Skip to main content

Full text of "The divine right of episcopacy asserted : wherein is proved, that episcopacy is of divine, and apostolical institution ..."

See other formats







Treasure %oom 




Divine Right 


Wherein is Proved, 

That Episcopacy is of Divine, and 

Apoftolicai Institution : And that it 
was the Government of the Chnftian 
Church during the Three firfl: Ages of 
it •, and was delign d to be Perpetual in 
it to the End of the World. 
An Account of the,Diftin&ion of the Three 
Orders of Bifhop, Prejhyter, and Beacon. 

To Reconcile the DifTenting Parties to that 
Form of Church-Government. 

By a Pytjtyrerofthe Qbyrch ^England, 

With a Preface; by George. Hicke, d D<D. 

Xdtflt 9*2 &t4 6 elui/i ;Cor, XV. 10. 
Per Convitta^ & Laudes^ 2 Cor.'vi. 8. 

L N h H 9 
3ted by W, B. tor Richakd SafvE at 
Grays-Inn-Gate in Holborn, 1708. 


( & ) 




MAny things have happened of late 
Years, which have given frefti 
occafion to jta ned Men, of wri- 
ting in defence of the Holy Order 
Of Bifhops, in which, and with which all the 
Churches of the Chfiftian World were foun- 
ded, arrd Uniformly governed by it for above 
Fifteen Hundred Years. But to the great 
difhonour of God$ the great hurt of Chri-. 
ftianity; the juft offence, and indignation of 
the Epifcopal Communions 5 >v; fcorn, and 
bbduration of o >r Adveffaru C to the Refor- 
mation : And, what is yet worfe, to the Joy v 
and Exultation not only of the Antiepifcopal* 
b- the Antichriftian Se&s among us, I mean' 
thpDeifls, and Unitarians : The Apoftoiicai 
Order hath been depofed, and abolifhed again 
in the Scoiijb Dominions of Great Witain, and 
what is ;c as deplorable, the Fad hatfr. 

fi been 

iv The Preface. 

been implicitly defended by no vulgar Pen 
among the dignified Clergy upon Princi- 
ples, which, were they true, would juftifie 
the abolilhing of it not only among the 
Englifi y as well as the Scots., but in all the 
Epifcopal Churches of the World. Evil Pra- 
ctices maintain'd by as ill Principles in fuch 
an Age, and Place of Latitude, as England 
now is, muft needs have a great, and danger- 
ous Influence upon the Church, which fome 
good and learned Men considering, have 
written in defence of Epifcopacy upon the 
drift, true, and Catholick Principles of An- 
tiqu'.ry, to check, and ftop,, as much as m 
them lies, the progftjfs of thofe new, loofe, 
and faife Principles, which may ferve at all 
times to encourage any Secular Powers, that 
are inclined to do fo great a Wickednefs, to 
abolid Hot only :he Order of Bifhops, but 
that of Priefts in all the Chriftian States, and 
Kingdoms of the World. For as a mod 
learned, and judicious * Author long fince ob- 
ferved, the very fame Arguments, that the 
Presbytrrians urged againft the neceffity of the 
Epifcopal Order, Mmiftry, and Power of Or- 
•dinat!on,which are the foundation of Church- 
Government, the Sefts, which fprarg up un- 

* l*fce Author of rl ■ ntitvic J, A Brief Account of An- 

• Qyvernwci ~n (everal Akdern Wri- 

the Tnsb^n'uv.s\ V:i^ Aii.?inbH of Divines, Jus Divi- 
ci-ii Anglicani. ft 's A { oiogia pro Senrentia 

' Edition. londm y printed 
u the Ship in St, $8$. 

The Pre f ac z. 7 

der them, ufed againft the Necejfity of their 
Order , Mini/try, and ajjitmed Power of Ordi- 
nation 3 offer twg } that if any Ordination were 
neceffary, a Company of Believers ajjociuted to- 
get her may ordain without a Prieji of either 
Order, and thai Impofition of Hands may be 
performed* by fame of the Brethren appointed 
thereunto by the Church : Which is the very 
Principle afferted in oppofition to Prices 
^ Pnefthood. by the Penin^:) of the Book 
of Rights. 

I have aken occaSo i to mention :he 
of Ancient ■ Chnteh rnment ro in#k aK 

true Friends. k and Sons 01 tfre Cb^rch of 
<4and to r?ad it, fcfpefhlly the younger 
;y who nray pien r ^ to tal:e notice, that 
by I m the I r e Pag* . Che Aurhoi prin- 

:ant Dr*i YiMvgfhet in his Irenicnm* 
Ihe chief of whofc Arguments againft rhe 
Il^.?lr;rable Divine Right of F.pifcopacy he 
bath fi'-y anfwerei without Naming the 
Learned Auth- r The Reader i ideed will 
d by feme Ixpreffions in be took, that 
hor was of the Roai3 \ • 
learned Men o tha Cnurch have 
written oiotl e cellentl; m defence of many 
Articles of the Faith: So hatfifhe written wkbf 
no lefs Learamg, Judgment, and Strength of 
Reafoning in defence of the Government of 
(he Catholic*; Church.' 

But to return to the new Ofcca Sons* that 
are given r. fee . frncc of the 

, an<> Qovernme 


vi The Preface. 

petual, and unalterable Divine Inftitution, t 
think I may juftly take notice of a late French 
Book entituled: Entretiens fur la Correfpon- 
dance fraternelk de VEglife Anglicane , avec 
les autre s Eglifes Reformees 3 Printed, as I be- 
lieve, at London, under the Name of Atxfter- 
dam, mdcc vii. In this Book are colle&ed 
the Teftimonies of many learned Men of the 
Epifcopal Communion, who of their great 
Charity, and Compaffion to the foreign Re- 
formed Churches, have fpoken more, or lefe 
in favour of them 5 as certainly every good 
Man ought to do, as far as is confident with 
the Divine Authority of the Sacerdotal Mif- 
fion, and the Authority, and Honour of the 
Chriftian Priefthood, as founded in the Per- 
fon, and Office of the Mejfias, the great Apo- 
ftle, and High Prieft of our Profeffion, who 
fent his Apcftles, as the Father had before 
fent Him, to execute the fame Apoftolical 
Epifcopal, Paftoral Office, which was to 
continue in them, and their SuccefTors unto 
the end of the World. But in that Col- 
lection there are fome Sayings of good, and 
great Men, which are not reconcileable to 
this Do&rine, which I think is as fundamen- 
tal, and eflTential to Chriftianity as a Society, 
as the Articles of Faith are to it, as a Se&$ 
and which, if carried on to all their Con- 
fequences, would Hdanger, if not fubvert 
the Divine Confutation of the G&tholick 


The Preface. vii 

It was to maintain the Church upon this 
fundamental Do&rine,that I fuppofe Dr. Welles 
of late took the pains to write fo many ex- 
cellent Letters, full of Learning, and Reafon, 
to defend the Government, and Orders of 
the Church of England, and (hew the No- 
velty, and Invalidity of the Presbyterian 
Model, and Miffion$ and that the Reverend 
Dr. Samuel Bradford in his excellent Sermon 
preached in Lambeth-Chapel at the lateCon- 
fecration, hath very feafonably in this Age 
of Latitude told the World : That though 
there were no exprefs Testimonies to be found 
in f acred Writ, yet the plain and certain ac- 
count , which we have of the di ft i notion of Bi- 
Jhops,' and Presbytery as ftp. and infe- 

riour Officers in the fever a! :s planted 

by the Apoflles, of which we bw Hijlory, 

even down fuccejjively from nes, is of 

it felfa Teftimony fo very clear, thai it is hard 
to conceive how any, thai are not Slaves to an 
Hypothefis, fiould withjland the force of it, fa 
as ever to bring that matter into farther de- 
bate* In another place heafferts to the fame 
purpofe, * that the principal Pafiors, the Bi- 
fhops, were fettled by the Apojlles before they 
left the World in the Churches, which* they had 
planted to fucceed them in prefiding over all 
others. And then fpeaking of Chrift, faith 
he, It was our Lord, who gave the Pafiors^ 
md Teachers, (fpoken of in* his -Text) as a 

f P<ig. 7. O&avo Edition. * P. 8 

A 3 fettled, 

yni The Preeace. 

fettled, and /landing Minifiry, by virtue of the 
Authority, and Power, which he afcended into 
Heaven to exercife. He himfelf is the chief 
Pajlor, andBiflwp of Souls, and thefe are given 
by him to officiate in his Name, and by his 
Authority. As the Church of Chrift is not fitch 
a Voluntary Society, as that the Members of 
it lie under no Obligation to ajffociate, and to 
hold communion with each other : So neither 
are thofe , who minifler to our Lord in his 
Church, fubjeci to the arbitrary appointment of 
the People, either to be fer up, or depofed at 

their pi e afire.* -f All therefore that I in* 

fend to ajjert is, what is very evident both from 
facrecl Writ, and the con ft ant Practice of the 
mojl pure and primitive Ages . of Chriflianity, 
that the Authority, by which the Officers of the 
Chrift iau Church exercife their rejpcclive Fun- 
ctions in that Body, was neither at firfi given , 
nor can he taken away by the arbitrary Will, and 
Pleufure of Men ^ but that as it was derived 
from our Lord : So it is to be continued, and 
exer cifed in his Name.- — j| From this account, 
it will be eafie to infer the true Boundaries be- 
tween that Authority, and Power, which truly 
belong to the Church, and that which the State 
of right challexgeth, and to Jhew that there is 
no interfering between ifym^ no fuch Imperium 
in Impede, as can he charged with limiting, 
and endangering the jujl Authority of the Civil 
Magijlrate, as is all along faljly, and very mail' 


?. <?> !! P. % io. 


The Preface. ix 

tioujly infinuated by * late* Author. — f This I take 
to be the Sum of the Spiritual Authority, which 
is conferrd upon the Miniflers ofChrift's Church, 
and belongs to them only, and this whether the 
Civil State he Chrifiian, or Pa^an. For the 
Converjion of a Nation to Chriftianity doth not 
at all alter the Cafe. The Church is fill a 
difcind, though not a feparace Society f 
the Chriftian Nation. It hath its proper Of- 
ficers, and they their proper Work, which ap- 
pertains not to the Civil Magi (Irate, but is fiill 
peculiar to them, as it was before. To the 
fame pur pole, We of this Church had indeed 
the fpecial Privilege, and Happixefs in our Re- 
formation from the Corruptions of Popery, that 
the Civil Power was forward^ ard zealous in 
the Work 5 and whatfoevcr was done in it. t was 
with its full con fen*. Had it been oth 
it had been never t helefs' 'the Duty of our Church 
to have broken off from the Roman Communion , 
and to have reformed itfelfj and in that cafe 
the diflincfion of the Two Societies, Civil and 
Eccleiiaflical, would have very plainly appeared. 
But fince it did, reform with the appVob.rtion^ 
and by the ajjiflance of the. Civil Poitfirs, the 
dijlin&ion is no lefs real, ho: i vifible it 

may be to fome fort of Men. 

I muftconfefs it is with g^at Satisfa&ion 
that I read fuch things publiihed by any of 
the Clergy. For I have tMerved for Forty 
Years together that Latitude of Opinion, as 

z Chrirtiaa Church. f P. ife 

A 4 to 

x the Preface. 

to the Frith, hath grown up with Latitude 
of Opinion, as to the Polity, and Govern- 
ment of the Churchy and if the Miniftry of 
the Church of England defire that the Peo- 
ple fhould ftri&ly adhere to the divine Re- 
velations, they muft teach them to adhere 
ftri&ly to the divine btjlithtions once deli- 
vered to the Saints, and to contend for 
thefe, as well as thofe. I take this occafion 
farther to declare, that to the beft of my 
obfervation, Men who are loofe, as tp 
the Principles of Church-Government, are 
alfo for the generality loofe, as to the Do- 
ftrines of Faith efpecially, as to the Con- 
fubftantial Doftrine, the coequality of three 
Perfons in the Holy, and Blefled Trinity, 
and the Union of the Godhead, and Man- 
hood in Cbrift, not to mention other Do- 
ftrines. And I ve y well remember how 
thefe Latitudinarians among the Clergy were 
formerly courted , and cry'd up by the o- 
pen, and fecret Arians, and Socinians of the 
Town, as well as the Dijfenters 3 and about 
Six and \ wenty* Years ago, vhen feveral of 
the Minifters of London had agreed together 
to preach £ip ther true Principles of Church- 
Government, and the divine Original of it, 
together with the Authority of the Clergy 
over the People, aod thereby to let them 
know what kind bf Society the Church 
was, their defign was broken by one of 
thofe, who objected. That it was no- then 
feafonabje, and that it would look, as be 


The Pre fac e. xi 

faid, like preaching up our Selves. But O 
bleffed God ! Did not thy Son, our Saviour 
Jefus, preach up the Authority, and Million, 
which thou gaveft him? And did not his 
Apoftles preach up the Million, and Autho- 
rity he gave them ? And did not their Suc- 
ceflbrs preach up the Authority of their Mif- 
fion from them ? And did they not all preach 
it up, without preaching up themfelves ? Did 
not St. Ignatius thy holy Martyr preach up the 
Authority of the Clergy over the People, 
and the great Authority of the Bifhop, over 
both, about Sixteen Hundred Years fince, 
without preaching up himfelf ? And did not 
thy Holy Martyr Thomas Cranmer preach up 
the fame Authority, in his Sermon of the 
Authority of the Keys, One Hundred and Six- 
ty Years fince, without preaching up himfelf? 
And mud: not thy Minifters of both the Or- 
ders, which thou haft ordained in the Church, 
be feverely anfwerable to Thee, asTraditors 
of their Truft, for not preaching up thatMif- 
fion, and the Authority thou halt given them 
by it, if through their negle&'to.prlach k y 
thy People come to deTpife. both it, and 
them, and Sovereigtr* ll Sf ates \ and, Princes, 
and their People happen thr heir Si- 

lence, to think it no Sacrilege v but lawful for 
m ro invade the Kingdom of thy Son, and 
depofe his chief Officers in that very King* 
dom of Heaven, and Hierarchy upon Earth, 
of whi£h the greateft Monarchs are made 


xii The Preface. 

Members by Baptifm, in no other manner, 
than the meaneft of their Subje&s are. 

Wherefore let all the Clergy, whether Bi- 
fiiops, or Priefts, who by Preaching, or Print- 
ing inftruft the World in the divine Inftitu- 
tion of Church-Government, the divine Na- 
ture of their own Miffion, and the Superiori- 
ty, and Authority they have by it, as God's 
Minifters over their Flocks, take Comfort in 
what they do, and as good and faithful Ser- 
vants to their Traft, expeft their Reward 
from their Matter at the Great Day. 

This Learned Author, who is not known 
to me, fo much, as by Name, hath done his 
part in this excellent Work $ Wherein he 
hath maintained the Divine Right of Epif- 
copacy from its firft Original, and fhew'd 
from the beft Monuments of Antiquity, how 
it was received in the Three firft Centuries, 
as the perpetual, unalterable Government of 
the Churchy This he hath done with great 
Modefty, and as great Refpeft to the Re- 
formed foreign Churches, and their Refor- 
mers, *~only bewailing their cafting off the 
Epifcopal Order, and Form of Govern- 
ment, and deviling a new Form bf their 
own, to the Prejudice, and let me add to 
the Scandal, pf the Reformation, and hin- 
dring of the Benefits of an entire Catho- 
lick Union, and Communion of ours with 
other Reformed Churches ^f and though he 
is willing to believe any thing that may be 

* P. 2oi. t p » *93» 

* faid 

The Preface. xiii 

faid in favour, or excufe of the firft Refor- 
mers of them, from the Circumftance of 
Time, and State of Affairs, when they began 
to reform, and to look upon them with all 
the Compaflion, and Allowances, that are 
due to good Men 5 yet he doth not think, 
he faith, that any thing alledged in their 
excufe can ftri&ly juftitie their cafting off 
Epifcopacy, or the perfeverance of their 
Churches m the abdication of it, becaufe 
they have been long free; from tbcfe Dif- 
ficulties, and Nee villi: .s, which are pleaded 
in their behalf 

In truth I can lcarce here forbear to an- 
fwer all the Pleas thai; are made for their 
justification from Ntcejfity, and all the other 
Arguments for them ^ as that Epifcopacy is 
not an Article of Faith 5 that they are only im- 
perfeff, and defe&we Chntyhts\ and the reft 
that are collected in the French Book men- 
tioned above, or mentioned in the Defence 
of the Bilhop of Sarums Expofoion of the 
XXIII. of the XXXIX. Articles, or in the 
Hiftory of the Englifj and Scotch Presbytery, 
faid to be -written in French by in eminent 
Divine of the Reformed Church, and cran- 
fhted into Englifl\ and printed in a Second 
Edition corrected and enlarged in VILLA 
FR 4NCA, an ominous Name for London, 
1660, As 1 am as much as any Prieftof the 
Church of England for fraternal Correfpon- 
dc> \i the foreign >ed Churches: 

bo A : .hink the bell ule tfiat can be made of 


xiv The Preface. 

it, is to feew the Infufficiency of thofe Ar- 
guments, which either their Minifters, or fome 
of our Clergy have ufed in behalf of their 
Reformation, and Miffion $ and to befeech, 
and obteft them in the Spirit of Meeknefs to 
put the latter out of all queftion, and doubt ^ 
by returning to that Form of Ecclefiaftical 
Polity, which Chrift Jefus appointed by him- 
felf, and by the dire&ion of his Holy Spirit 
for the ftandwg unalienable Government of 
his Church, I *hink this much more be- 
coming the Charity of any Chrifttati Bithop, 
or Prieft, than to (both them up in their 
Error, and devife Shifts of Arguments againft 
the Authority, and Practice of dieCatholick 
Church, to harden both their Magiftrates, and 
Minifters in the continuance of r .\ fir''7l Exor* 
bitanc^ which they ought to redrefi. But I 
am confined within the limits of a Preface to 
another Author's Book,and therefore (hall con 
elude this Paragraph, which I fear will be un- 
grateful to fame, with the Words of my Lord 
Chancellor Clarendon, of honourable and fa- 
mous Memory, which I have tranferibed out 
of an imperfeft Letter , written by him a 
little before his Death at Rouen in France. 
I cannot, faith he, but obferve, without taking 
delight in the Obfervation , how great Pains 
grave Divines of the Church of England take % 
to have our Church thought to be of the fame 
Religion with the other, whileji their Pajiors 
fttpercilioujly look ^pon themfelves a • having 
need of their accept or countenance : Wefeem 


The Preface. xv 

to dejire to be thought like them, when they do 
not in the leaji degree appear willing to he 
thought like us 5 and when in the 'Ofurpation 
of Cromwell, and the Defolation to which our 
poor Church was reduced, they made no fcruple 
to declare it Antichrijiian, they arc now reduced 
to fo much good manners, as to believe us in a 
ft ate of Salvation, without fo much as lament- 
ing thtir own DefeSs, which the greatejl Men 
thai have been of their Communion had the 
Modefty heretofore to do and feemd to grieve 
thai it was not in their power to make iheir 
Reformation, as our* was. if the differ erne that 
is now in our Temper proceeds fiom our Chri- 
Jiian Metkjnefs and Charity, let us before we 
think toe well of,he Soil, jtaj till we Jee thofe 
Virtues tranflanUd, and pro] pet there, and 
produce the jamt Inclination in them, wnicb 
Men would perfuade us to have. I am fure I 
have no Authority to. condemn them, becaufe 
my Mother the Church hath not dirc'iily con- 
demned them 5 but I am not furt * that every 
private Man is at liberty to chooft a Communion 
for himfelf becaufe his Church hath not taken 
upon it, ij tonde&n it. It will become every 
true Son of the Church of England, to have 
that Reverence for it, as not to prvftitute his 
Dignity to a compliance with a left per fed Com- 
tn>ivion, when he is not necejfitated to it. It 
was no light Reproach that Tally charged upon 
* Q'tat part of the Roman Senate, Qui fpem Ca- 
tiljax mollibus Senteotiis aluerunt, conjuratio- 
neqjqut iiaicentem, non crcdendo corrobora- 


xvi The Preface. 

verunt. It had been very happy for the Church, 
if it had fnfferd only by her Emmies, and 
thofe who hated her, who were never numerous 
enough to have deftroyed her ^ its ruine pro- 
ceeded from thofe , who wifjed her no harm, but 
thought by little Compliances to have fatiated 
the DeJ/res of many Men, who appear d more 
moderate than the reft. 

The Letter out of which I have tranferibed 
this Pafiage, is written in his Lordfhip s own 
Hand, and it 13 afl Anfwer to fofflfe Friend, who 
had written a Letter full of Interrogatories to 
him, whereof thefirft wa? ; Why he had not been 
fan info long time at Q .^veily, the Huguenots 
Temple $ Which his Friend told him was ta- 
ken notice of, and the more, becaufe he had here- 
tofore been fometimes prefent at the fame De- 
votion* at Mont[ ellier 4m d heeaufe r Auteur 
des Entretiens abewe cited takes fo much 
pains to prove, that dm great Man was feen 
at theTemple in MONTPELLIER, 1 will 
give him a farther proof of it, and of the 
Reafons, why he went, I fuppofe once or 
twice to each Temple there, but would not 
go to the Temple at Slueveliu I dare not 
tell you, filth he, that my having been already 
in thefi Congregations at Montpellier, and ob- 
fervel all that. is done there, if rather an Ar- 
gument, why Ifoould not go to Quevelly, than 
why I flmtld. For when '. a Man hath fuf 
ficiently fatisfied his Curiofity , which a Man 
may lawfully do, and informed his Judgment^ 
whith in a manner, he is bound to do, when he 


T/;e Preface. xvii 

hath opportunity to examine any Customary 
Forms in the Exercifes of Religion, in what 
Clajfes foever : He ought afterwards to frequent 
that Communion, which he befi approves of and 
which mojl advances the Practice of Chrijiian 
Duties 5 and therefore, as the Defire of being 
taken notice of is a very corrupt End of going 
to Church : So the being fallen rot he of for not 
being there, is an Argument of no more weight 
to carry me thithet, than the life taking notice 
z.onld be u carry me to theMafs. But to give 
you an avfwer, that will be won fatisfaclory, 
(nvdwh'^h cannv, but fmsjlz \„hi fi ft §>nejiion, 
} fell you i bat I have a * Chaplain in my own 
Houje^ by vch f Adffrt tiftrafiiri L perform my 
i cvs in Ktim>i. ] think, than I 

> lain pairi U ny rj't/- Te'u/cj. 
♦V v>fe the Proof * lave brought o- his 
•Vlbip: going t j the Temples at Mcr/tpeUkr 
n ->\ T.'per (e that Author's painb of bringing 
any otlr ov proofs, becaufe I have given him 
the R^afotij L] ire \ycnf thirher. To which 
I Will add another Paffoge, which intimates 
the Re^fon why his Lo^dfh/p would riot go 
faith he, If the Pdjtors of theje 
Con 4s are not wtfa or fuffi-aenlly Or- 

\ined, (which I fay agah., popart '-iiUr Matt 
ih the Authority ^nor c je the Prc- 

-cption to cbi ermine) lw{ -ere. There 

,:&ongf. %he*t Mem of very em '-treat Learn- 

Deaa of Brijlr-. ! ,;ir& of Magd, Hjii! y 

xviii The Preface. 

ing, and unquefiionable Virtue : I wifh theni 
all fuck. But that their being irreconcileable 
Enemies to the Papijls, foould be an Obligation, 
to me, or any other Man to communicate with 
them, I cannot admit. To communicate Coun- 
fels with them, may poljibly be at fometimes 
convenient, and lawful 5 but to communicate 
in the Sacrament \ that w,ts injiitutcd for the 
Reconciliation of Mankind , with them , who 
are, and becaufe they are irreconcileable tc ano- 
ther great Body cf Chrifl, feems to be an Ar- 
gument drawn rather from the Principles of 
Machiavel, than from the Precept 'i of the GofpeL 
To this for his Lordfh'p's Honour, let m£ 
add what he faith in anfwer to another Que- 
ll ion : Tou ask me, whether I do not thinly 
that my Condition hath need of many Friends, 
and that my Comply ance in this particular 
would reconcile many good Men to me. Where- 
as the contrary doth provoke them. Which i& 
a Suejiion pertinent indeed, but can never be 
jireiched into an Argument, to reconcile aMan y 
who loves himfelf no better than I do, and 
who fears new Misfortunes no more than I do. 
I have always had a Reverence for old Elea- 
zer, who would noi be perfuaded by thofe who 
loved him , to provide, and bring with him hi$ 
own Meat, and' to make-, as if he did eat of the 
Flefi taken from the Sacrifice 3 but chofe rather 
to Jhffer Death, with all the Circumflances of 
Torment, than to be guilty offuch odious Dif- 
fiwula+ion. For it^ becometh not our Age,, faid 
he, in avy wife 'to dijfemble^ whereby many 
* • young 

The Preface. xix 

young Parfons might thinks that Eleazer being 
Fourfcore Tears old, and Ten, was now gone to 
a firange Religion-^ and fo through my Hypo- 
crifie fionld be deceived by me, and I get a 
jlain in my Old Age, and make it abominable, 
2Maccab. vi. 24, 25. 

I muft alfo acquaint that Author, that my 
Lord in his Aniwer to his Friend, plainly 
tells him, He would not fpeak, all he thought \ 
but anjwer him warily , thtt he might not be 
injured iy his captious £?jujli >rj, vib- 

fiance of two, cr ihrte oj which. , (aith he, 
// contained in one jho t U*u(iio;> * Whether I 
do not believe that the L'uftors oj that Church 
are fnfficiently qualified to be God's Minijiers 
in the Preaching of hi /, and the Admi- 

nistration of his S., !'. ^0 i-..:ch faith 

he, I frankly anfwer you, I will not tell you 
what I think, in that particular, finte I am riot 
qualified to deliver my Opinion in that pointy 
when the Church, of which I am a Member, 
doth not, I thank God, take upon her to cenfltre 
any other Church. 

But to retdroi. tQ .the iou$ Author of 

this Book, he is always as r.-vA- 
ture of his Undertaking 
be, of the Reputation of the k irifltors, a 
Members of the foreign Rei I Caarche*. 

particularly in Page 7. after a gentle Ke- 
fleftion upon our Presbyterians , layh he, i 
except jrom this Cenfure thefi modeft ', an i 
learned Men ^f foreign 1 though 

they fibmit to armh [peak • 

'".aval' * 

xx The Preface. 

nourably of the Epifcopal, and when occafion is 
given, fubfcribe freely to it, blaming their Bre- 
thren who have written againji it. This he 
hath faid with great Judgment. For it was 
neceffary to make a diftin&ion among the 
Learned Men of foreign Churches, as to their 
Inclinations to the Church of England. Wit- 
nefs Archbifhop Whitgifis Letter to Beza in 
the 40 th Page, and XV th Number of the Ap- 
pendix to the fecond Edition of Mr. Somners 
Antiquities of Canterbury 5 the Writings of 
D. Blondel, and Claud. Salmafms againft the 
Epifcopal Order , of which Dr. Hammond 
had reafon to complain in his Epiftle Ad 
Virum Integerrimum, before his Anfwer to 
Blondel, Dallees Spiteful, but vain Attack, 
upon the Epiftles of St. Ignatius mdclxvi. 
Bafnage's late Church-Hiftory $ but above all 
the Hague-Sermon, with the French Minifters 
Approbation, which fince it was taken no- 
tice of, I hear hath been fuppreffed. 

But to proceed, The Author of this Book 
obferves with great Judgment in the 9 th and 
1 1 5 th Pages, that the Apoftles in the Infancy 
of the Church, had only the Fundamental Prin- 
ciples of Ecclejiajiical Government, and Difci- 
pline, in the Subordination of the Miniftry to 
the ApoftolicalPreheminence, and Authority, 
which is the Foundation of the Epifcopal Su- 
periority in all Churches, and was fo at firft 
in the Churches over which they always 
fet one Paftor over all the reft. In other 
Circumftantial Refpe&s the Church in her 


The Preface, xxi 

Infant-ftate might differ from the more re- 
gular Form, which (he afterwards had, and 
was fettled in by the Apoftles. For that State 
was her Prophetical Period, in which on 
all Occafions, and in all Exigences the Vice- 
gerent, and Deputy of our Lord, I mean the 
Holy Ghoft, directed what (hould be done. 
Then (lie had Prophetical, and fome of them 
Temporary Teachers by immediate Infpira- 
tion ^ then (he had Paftors, and Governors 
appointed by immediate Dire&ion from the 
Holy Ghoft, who upon fome Emergencies 
gave Men, not yet orda m.c o the Prieftly 
Office, authority to perform Sacerdotal Ads* 
Then the Holy Ghoft, as i may fay, fat in 
Council with the Apoftk, and iire&ed them, 
and others what to fay, and do at fucb, and 
fuch times $ as it is written, He that hath an 
Ear, let him hear, what iht Spirit dial is, what 
Chrift by his Spirit, faith hnto the Churches* 
The Spirit then more immediately prefided 
over the Churches, and the Governors of it, 
dire&ing them in all Doubts, and fuppiying 
all their Wants, and teaching :hem to call 
upon God by the Title of Father y and how 
to pray in their Affemblies, when they knew 
not what to ask, or how to pray c Thus 
the Churches were governed, and admini* 
ftred during the Scripture-period, before they 
were fettled under the regular Form, and 
Conftitution of Bifhops, Priefts, and Dea- 
cons in orderly Subordination. Of which 
we have a moft clear account in St. Ignatius'* 

a 2 FDiftles- 

xxii The Preface. 

Epiftles, who was St. Johns Difciple, in which 
he exhorts the People to be fubject to the 
Clergy, and among the Clergy, the Deacons 
to be fubjeft to the Presbyters, the Presby- 
ters to theBilhop, as the Biflhop is fubje& to 
Chrift. This was the Beautiful , and Har- 
monical Frame, and Order in the firft fettled 
Churches, which hath ever fince continued, 
and ought to continue till the Second Com- 
ing of Chrift. This is the Conftitution of 
the Catholick Church, as it is a Society, by 
Divine Appointment. The Root, and Foun- 
dation of which is, as I faid, the Apoftolical 
Superiority, and Power in the Biftiop, to 
whom both Clergy, and Laity are to be fub- 
jeS 5 'tis the Phrafe of St. Ignatius, as to the 
Power of God, and chief Minifter over his 
Church next. under Chrift. 

In the next place, The Learned Author I 
hope will pardon me, if I take notice of one 
Omiftion, oT which I my felf have often 
been guilty, and I think moft of the Divines 
of our Church, at leaft, thofe, who have 
written of late Years. * That Omiffion is 
this : That when we fpeak of the Nature 
of the Priefthood, and what belongs to the 
Priefts Office, we fpeak of it, as if it wholly 
confifced in Preaching the Word, and Admi- 
mjlrtng the Holy Sacraments , without men- 
tioning the Power of the Keys, which is as 
Efifential to the Priefthood, and as much 

Pag. 9 . 


The Preface. xxiii 

the Glory of it as either of the other two. 
One would wonder howPrieftsof the Church 
of England fhould be guilty of fuch an OmiP 
fion, when in the Form of Ordination the 
f Power of loofing, and binding, or of ab- 
solving, and refining Sins, is the very firft 
thing which is mentioned, as belonging to 
the Office of a Prieft^ and in the Abfolucion 
after the general Confeffion in Morning, and 
Evening Prayer, it is faid,' That God hath 
given Power, and Commandment to his Briifis 
to declare, and \ ton ounce fa his Peop! 
penitent the Abfpl it ion, and Rinujior vfthx 
Sins. And in. the Omce for the Vification 
of the Sick, it is exprefly affirmed, That God 
hath left Power to his Church, that is to , 
Priefts of the. Church, to abfolve AlTSinnert, 
who truly rjepentj and believe in him 5 -^nd 
therefore direds the Confef/hy to abfolve 
the confejjing Penitent of all Ls Sins t in ths 
Name, Sec. 

Wherefore that my taking notice of this 
Omiffion may make deeper Imprellionupon 
the Minds of my Brethren of the Clergy, 
and that I may encourage them by fo great 
an Example, when they fpeak or write of 
the Chriftian Priefthood, always to fpeak, 
and write exprefly of the Power of binding, 
and loofing Sinners, commonly called the 

t Wbefe Sins thou dofl forgive, they are forgiven, and whoje 
Situ thou doft retain, they are retained; and be then a faithful 
difpenfer yi the V/ord of 0%i, and of his Holy Sacraments, in the 
Nam?, &c. 

a 5 Power 

xxiv The Pre e ace. 

Power of the Keys, as belonging to the Priefts 
Office : I here prefent them with Archbiftiop 
Grangers Sermon upon that Subjeft, with 
this Title : & ^ettttOlT Of tyt ^UtijOJttte 
Of tf)Z &at?0|3u This excellent Sermon is in 
foLccxxvi. of his Book entituled CATE- 

chismvs, cftat is to fay a ftozt %n> 
ffructton into C^ifttan iSeltgton, &c. 
by ti)t moft iSeberenD {father in ©oil, 
Cijomass arcpifljop of Can tetbu??., &iU 
matt of all CnglanD, an& S©etropoit^ 

t&tt£» GualterHsLynneexcndebat^i^d. This 
Book is dedicated by the Archbifhop to King 
Edward VI. and in his Epifile Dedicatory he 
tells his Majefty, he wrote it with a defign 
to inftruft the Youth of the Realm, thereby 
to help forward the Reformation $ and in 
his Preface he declares, he deligned it for a 
ftiort uniform Inftru&ion of Children, and 
young Men, to prevent fundry, and diffe- 
rent Forms of Inftru&ion $ which otherwife 
would happen, if every feveral Paftoi 4 were 
left to devife a Form for his own Flock. 

a fcrmoti 

The Preface. xxv 

IT 3 fctmon of tt)e auti)o:itic of 
ttje Bapcs* 

J^c J)oIpc SEpodle feintf: #aul 
gooD ef)ii&?cn., in tfjc tcntlj cfja* 
piter of &ig cptaic to tlje f!o* 
mapnc& torptct!) 011 tljtg fa- 
tytom l©foofo eticr fl;al eal bpon 
rfje name of f Jje Io:d^ ftall be la= 
ntb. 25ut goto 0;at tfiep call on 
Jjpm, on fcrtjom tjjep fideue not 5 $oiu ftjal tfjcp 
lielebc on ftim ot totome tfjep gauc not Ijcarfce ? 
I^oiuc ftatl tgcp ftrare fcmtjout a &cacgcr 5 
I^otue tyai tfjep pjeacfj, ercejrt tftep fie feme J 
23p tfje ta^icl} toeiir&e£ fapnet $aul tioet^ cui* 
oentlp Hectare tatto to?, ttoo Ir(ftm$» 

Cfte fp:tt iif j tgat it is neceiTarp to our fal* 
ttation, to fjauc p:eac£er£ ant! miniacr$ of 
<3ofciic£ mootfe ftolp ftoj&r, to inftructe tt£ in 
t%t true faptft ant* feuotnlege of <?3ot»* 

Cfte fecorifce i? tljat p^eac!jcr£ nrnft not runne 
to tf)i£ fjpsfte Jjonojc, fiefoje tljcp fie caUcti 
r creto, 6ut tfjep mufte fie o?&rpisc& an& ap* 
■mtcU to tljt£ office, anb rent to W &p <&$%+ 
f 02 it i$ not pottifife to fie fabeti, 02 toplcafe 
o3otJ, tuitfjout faprlL ant* no nun can truclp 
ficlefcc in <Sob fin f}i£ ottm L 1 To: of ourc 

feifes tocftnotee not inljat tue tfnufae fielcue) 
fittt toe mnft ncefcg ijeare *?ofc£ tuoo^r^ tauggt 

2Egapnc, tfje teaefter^ except rljcp fie calfcb 
vintu Tent, can not frtitfuHp t*at fte- f oj tf)c fecbe 
Sobfceg toourbc, boctf) metier \_ 
tc fo?t§ ftupt ,onIc£ tift aoj&e 4|S w" * 
tl)e tiarnrft fco gpur incrcafr, ap*§t{. ' 

a 4 su& 

xxvi The Preface. 

anb fen fitg fjclpe fyimtt bo toourfcc teitfi t^c 
fq^er^ "JSut fiteb botfj not too?hc toiti) tlje 
pjticfitt, toljom Ije Ijatljc not fcnte a£ fapntt 
panic fapett)* 

Ufltn * ® oto * $ att *&*? V***ti}t $$ tgep lie 
** not fcnt- JD&eretbjeitijimguittte, 
tfmt p:eat$er£QouIb Be cailcb anb km of <3obj 
anb tfjep mttft gjcaclje aecojbing to tfjc autgo* 
jirie anb commiifion of <©oti, grauntcb tonto 
t&cm, togerc&p tfjep map ftrtugtgen menne$ 
&elefe, anb adore tftcir confticme^ t(jat<0ob 
gati) tommaunbeb tljem to gjeacge after tlji£ 
o? tljat tafyion* f o: elg cnerie manne fij 
ftpH lie in bou&t, anb tginfie after $}# fo?t* 
W r limWf® tof)ctf>et tljp^ be true, tnfrir 
ijeare tlje p?eac§cr fapS ipl)o can tc« &4>er!)cr 
45ob gat$ commaunbeb ftim to g:eaclj 1 
tf$pnge£ 0? no J 38 nb m cafe ije tcacfiteti 
tfjpngc 6nt trutfb pet 3' aw not lure tijat <©ob 
tepH tocurfte fcitij me as tfie p:ca$cr p?onip* 
fetl)> 3Pertt)aunee tfiefe tyhnxiUg gcricine io 
otfter ., anb not in mi i €Sefe bou&te& in tfjc 
tpme of temptation, migfit trouble men£ 
mpnbe$, pf foe toere not affureb^ tfjat our 
3io?be SfefitjSf €|ijift fyimfelfe fjatlic feotij ojbep* 
neb anb ajppointeb mimfter$ anb p.2ead;rr0 to 
tt&tfyz Wi)x$ fjolpe iuourbc., anb to m'inifter 
l\i0 facrament£, anb affo fjat^ appopnteb 
ilievm, tui?at tftep ftjal'f teaclje in gi$ name, 
anb toftat rtjcy fbaXl bo bnto to£\ €ljerfo:e Ije 
tallcb tljcmanb fenttften!, anb (rata fgcxn in- 
ftruction& toftattljcplBjonilbbo/onbrpeafie to 
\}g 3 in fji£ name, to tfte intente tftat toe fijoulbc 
Spue fure rrebehce toto tftepr tDo:be£ ., anb 
JMeue tljat *5cb topn tDojltctoitg) itjaf occo^bpngi 
to Sji£ teojbeg bp tgent fpofcem 9ilnb Ije Ijatij 
<M a * -w P?omifeb tf>crefo?e, tfjat ttjrjat lb* 

Jipat. fBM. cbfr t ^ p Q )mmt 6pn j bpon cart ^ 


The Preface. xxvii 

fljouf&e 6c Semitic in gcauen^ aiti hrtjatfoctocr 
tl>cp fljuiti lofc fcpou cart£ fljuifc 6e JofeD in 
Ijeaticn aire* IB^emojc geca rfjtffytn, to tUc 
inttntc pen map ItcSMtlpc Mct^aH tgingeg 
tD^iCi) 43ofc ftp U$ minifter£ fcoctij tt nb 

pjoniifr fcato pou, anti fo fee faucti £p psur 
taptfj, leant tiifigentlp % paai pou, fcp tufiat 
tDo?fcC£ cur lotiS^to €'t%t% gauc t|ji£ com* 
mifficn aiti tommaintienicnr to fji£ miniftcrsr, 
onto reftcrfe tt;;m fserc, Uiojtic to? inorti tljat fo 
pou map paint rtfcm in pour mcmo:ic£, ant* 
recite tijem tijc Better teljen pou come gome* 
Cfte tootie£ of €lfcift 6e tijefe* 

^ 0ur lio^Dc 3iefuj3 luetic ^^ 
otr litis Spottier, ana fays, 
iBeceaue t^e ijotye gotf, totiofe tynm$ 
yz fojgrae, ttjey arc fojjjffcen bnto 
tijenr. &nfc telioft fpmtejs ton referue, 
tfie? are referred* 

$ctu gco$ c^iltiKn, pou fljal entplop pout 
fdfe& not oneip to renerfe tilth U*ojot£ initio 
out hake, hut aifo to untscruanDe, totjat our 
3lo?t* 9irfU39? <ffft?ift ment 6p tfjern, tftat iBljen 
pou foall fie a^ftcfc a.ip qucftion ticrein, pou 
nuipe mafee a Dprctt anltocrr, a>ti that alio in 
tpnie to come pou mape he a&ie to inftrutt pour 
c^iltsjcn in tijt fame, f o? UJfjat greater fljamc 
c$n ttjer ht y either in tfte ttg&t of £>o& o; of 
man, tfyen to p:ofeffc t^iielre to Sc a €ft:ifteu 
man, atti pet to 6e ignorant in &I>a* place of 
fcripture ante fip tofjat tDo:£?c& £lj:ift com* 
mamtieti fait!}, rpti fojgpuene^ of fpiin$, to 6c 
p^eadjcD, ^eing t^at a €i)?iften man ougftt 
to Self -v; noting, a£ an article of fjis faiti),. 
zxxepi tjc fee affurefc, t!;at epffjcr it i# <®o£j£ 
tommamtiement , o* §i£ iBcjtJ, ^cUi rrooti 
t^ifDjf ; , t*W pou map? ttje Setter totiaTtantie 


xxviii The Preface, 

t^cfc toojtic^, of cur fauiour €tytftc, pou flfjan 
feno&e, ttiat our Sortie 5efu£ CJjnft toftcn tje 
feganne to ptcatlje, fjc fciti cal ahb cfjofc i)i£ 
ttuclttc 3lpoft1c£ 7 au& aftertoartic 
f^\ iU ficfpfcc£ tijofe ttocU^ He tent fo?tf> 

CiiHc T t ^ 2c ' co ? e au & tcmtc &P&ipfe£j ant* 
gafcc ttjem autljojitie to pjcacl) t^e 
gofpei 2EnD a little Mojc iji£ Dcatij ant* paP 
fton, fje mafcc iji£ pjapcr to l)i£ ftcaueulp ta- 
tter fo? t^cirn, ant! fo£ aU tfjofc ttjat fljoulfcc 6c- 
febe ttjojoto tijeir pjcactrmg* 
3ot>ti tf>tt. it i£ ticclareti in ti)e gofpel ot laznct 
Sfafttt* ji5oU) it i £ not to be fccufc 
tzb, but tfjat Cfciftr^pjaier toag fteattj, oft|t^ 
Ijcaucnip fatljcr, &{)ercfo?c it folo&etfh t|$at a£ 
niani ag fcclcucfc tfjc p?eacljing of CJ)nftc£ iDif= 
tuples., lucre a£ furclp fauebj a£ pf tyep £ati 
ijcarb anb ftclckcti <£fj?ift ijintfeife- 3tnii attcr 
<£f)nlte£ aftcntioat, tije 3EpolteHc# gate aut&o? 
jitic to ottjer goblp ant) Ijolpc men, to mmpfter 
<£5at»£ tuojbe., anb ctjiefelp in tfjofc placed lifter 
tljer toer €£:ilten men alretjp, kuj}icije iacfeeti 
p;eaclf}ct*£,anb t§c 2tpoftfc£ tfjeini fcluttf coufii 
not longer afiitsc toiti) tl|cm. f 0? tfjc 3tpoft?c£ 
&P& tBalfte atycti into tsiuerfe parted of tlje 
iBo:toe^ anti bit* ftufcpc to plant tfjegofpclin 
manp placed IBftercfoje toiler tljcp foun&e 
gotslp men, ant> mete to pjcadjc <$3cti£ toojfce^ 
tf^cp fapetj tgetr l)an&e£ fcpon t&cm, anDgauc 
t|efn tlfe ijolp goft, as tfep t|?cim elue£ terra- 
uefc of <£$j:ift tfyz fame fjolp goft, to execute tijig 

3HnH tftep tljat lucre To o^cpnetr, toc-rc in 
fcrfcc, anb aifo toerc called tije minifter^ of 
iDotJ a£ t?je 3Spofrc£ tijemfeluc0 tocrc^ a$ 
#aulc, fapcttj onto €pmotljp. 3tnts fo tlje 
rainiftration of &ob$ tuo:De (b^icft our %o:bt 
^efu^CIjuftftpmfelfetjpb tlritinfmutc) terns 


The Preface. xxix 

derpueb from tfje aipotfles bnto otftcr after 
tfjeim, bpimpofttion of &anbe& and gpupngc 
tfjc boJp gbeft, from tfjc Slpoftle.S tpme to cur 
Dat>c£» 3llnb t$ji£ toas? tfrc confcccatton^ojDjc^ 
ant* bnction of tfje 3£po(l!e£ ; togcrbp ttjcKat 
tfjc begpnnpnge^ made 23ilj)opc.$ and p petce^ 
anb ttjikfijall continctoc in tt}c tburcijc, cum 
to tlje toortde£ robe- 3t nd toljat for tier ore o? 
ccremonpe, Ijat!) ben added moje tfjan thi£ 
tommctJj of ma lines ojdwaunce and policpe,, 
and i$ not commaunded bp 43od£e£ tecjde- 

i^bciefee good cf)i tkjen, pou fljal gpue due 
reucrenec and fjonour ta the niiutftrr£ of tfte 
tbucebe., anb fljai not meanelp o? Ipggtlp etfemc 
tftemin ttje execution of tfjeir office^ but pou 
ftjall take rtKiu fa? 43od£ mimftrr& and tljc 
mellengerg of our 3to?de fj'efu^ C&tfte* f 02 
tf^ift fiimftfft fcietlj intljie gofpeL 
J^c tfjat ijearc n pou, ftcaretlj me. iiuuc jr. 
2£nb $e tbat bpTpifctfj pou, dpfpik 
ctfj me* t©fjcrcfb?c good cbtid-en., pou fijaH 
ftcdfafttp &deuc al rftofc r&ingc&togitfic fucfte 
miniftetjs? fijaH fpca&e bnto pou, irom tijc 
moutft , and Bp tfte temmaundement of our 
Hojde 3fc Riis? Cbjift. 3£nb btfjat foeuer tftep 
do to pou, as in^en tftepbaptpfe pou, toijcfi 
tfjep 3Pbe pou abfolutioir, and up tribute ta 
poii tffebodpeand blonde of ourJlo^^efu^ 
£f):iftc, tfjefc pou ffjall fo efteme, a£ pf Ctmfre 
tjpmfelft in f}i£ atone perfon, dpdfpeahe/and 
minifter bnto pou. f 0: C^ii'te batfj com* 
maunded %ig minifter^ to do tfjijef bnto pott, 

ib be bpnifelfe., (aitfjougljc pou feeftim not 
noiir bodifp epeg) i$ prefent tuitb b*S 
mimffcr£, and toojfcetlj bp tfje ijo*p gijoft in 
tftadmtniftration of tji£ factamenteg* 2£nd 
on tyr ctijer fpde,, pou fljalf take good gebe,, 
anb betoare, of fa!fr anb x:iim pjeacber£ a 


xxx The Preface. 

tol)idje pjpuilp crepe into tititg, and pjcaclje 
in co;net& Ijabpng ncne auttjojitic, no$ feeing 
called to tfti£ office, f 03 C^ifte i$ not p?e* 
fent toitf) fuel* p?cacl)er& and tljercfo?c dotlje 
not tlje l)olp god too?fte 6p tljeir p:cct)ing, Imt 
tfjeir too^dc i$ toitfjoute fruite o? p?ofpt 5 and 
tfjcp do great fjnrte in commen toettljc£. 3fo? 
fuc|c a£ 6e not called of <0od, tijcp no dou&te 
of it do erre, and foto a&;odc fymiyc and 
naugljtp doctrine. 9find pet pcu fljall not 
tfjinfte good cftildjcn, tftat pjcacljcr£ toljiclfje &e 
latofullp called,, Ijaue aiitftojitie to do o? teadie 
tofjat foeuer fljal plcafe tfjem. %&nt one 3lo?d 
Scfag Cf)?i(i, Ijatfjgpuen tfjem plapnc inftru* 
ttion^ tofjat tfjep blight to tcaclje and do. 3tnd 
pf tfyti teaclje o? do anp otljcr tljpnge, tt)en i& 
contepned in tljcir commiffion, tljen it i£ of 
no fojce, no? toe ougfjt not to rcgarde it. 5£nH 
fo? t$i$ canfe onr fauioure Cfpitt dpd fyeatl) 
into l)p£ difcpplc& and gane tljcm ifte ftolp 
Soft. £ o? tosjerc t&e ftolp goft i£, tfjec fje fo 
toajfteti), tljat ^e cauTetft W to do t^ofe tljpnge^ 
tu^ic^c C^ifte gatl) commaundciK 3tnd totjan 
t^at i£ not done, tljen tlje iiolp gljolt i$ not 
f fserc. a©fjcrefo?c all tijpnge^ toljicfie toe fljall 
fo fpea&e 02 do, can tafee none cffectc. $Mu 
tftc fummc of tlje conmnCCion tofjicljc Cfjnft 
gaue to $i$ dpfcipks, toa£ tlji& tijat tljep 
fljouldc pjeaclje rcpentaunce, and fo?gpuenes 
of ipnne, in fji£ name* 3Hnd l)e added t^etto, 
fiotlje a pjomife and a tf)?eatnpng, Taping, 
l^e tfjat toil Mcue, and bi fiaptifed, fljal he 
faned. 23m lie tljat toil not Meuc, fljall fie 
damned. f©f}crefo?c all tl)inge£ tofticfje tlje 
minifrer$ of tfye cfjnrcfje do fape 0? do to fc£> 
mgfyt to 6c directed to t&itf ende, tfjar tfteu 
mapelotofc t>& and declare toito u£ tlje fo?* 
gpucncs of our fpnne£, toften toe trulp repent, 


The Preface. xxxi 

anB Beleuc in €i}:itf. 23ut toljcn toe Bo not 
repent \\$ of our tpnne, and fojfaftc tfje fame,, 
02 Bo not Belcuc tlje gofpcl, tfien tl>cp ougfjt to 
BinB o: rcfcruc itnne ? and to BccJare Bnto B£., 
tfjat pf toe ftpl contfneto in fmne, toe fljal 6c 
BamneB fo? cues:* 3tnB tojfjen tfyt minpftcr£ Ba 
t&uifl? execute tljcir tomraiffion, ttjen t£cp o&ep 
o&oD, ants topofe fpnm^ foeiier tftcp fo?gpuc 
in cart}?, t^cir f§nm0 Be fo&puen in fteauen 
alfo. 3Hnb contrarpr topfe, toDomc focuer titcp 
BinBc in earth, tfteir ftnnc£ Be BounBc aifo in 
fteauen* 23m pt tije mtmftcr$ toolBe inters 
jnifc to tio contrarp to tljcir committor tgat 
ig to fcp, to fo:gpuc fpnne£ to tmrcpentannte 
fpnncrs anB Bn&deacr^ o? to BpnBe their 
fpnnes and Snipe tijeim aBfolution, tf^at Be 
repentaunte anD tntftc in t$t merepc of <&t& y 
then tt?ep tljouTiJc not Do tocl, no? tljcir arte 
ii?ouffce Be of anp fu?cc, but tljcp ItjoulD Be* 
ecanc rticmfelucp., anb otfjcr alio* 3EnB tjjan 
flioulo; ^at Be true, that €ij:ift fpeafteti} in 
tJje gaipeL IQtoii tfte BIpuBe IraBrtf} tlje 
BlinBe., Borij fail into n>e Bitlfsc- 2?ut totjen t j)e 
mimftei\s Bo trtilpe ejemtte tlieir office, pou 
ougfjtc gooB Ciri^ien to take great eomfojtc, 
anB to cenurme pour Faitfjc tljer&p, tfiat pou 
mapc ftcBfaftlpc Belcuc, anB in all teniptati> 
on£ anftoere pour aBucrfarpc i§z Bcueli after 
tms mancr* <0oB ipatfje fente to mc one of I )p$ 
numfter^ tit in tfjc name anB place of 3X 
fjatitjc BetiareB to mc tftc fo:gpujrnc£ ef mp 
fpnne£, anB gatij fioptifeb me in tijcaSurance 
of ti}c fame* " 

2£l;erfo:c 3? Boufetc not But tfcat mp fpmies 
6c fo2gmien, anB tljatS' ^Bc t^e fonnc 

anB tjeire of <©oB. 4$ti cgilB^cn, ytrn 

ougijt 'gene railp in all temptation^ tofo:u 
fo pour fa r & to eon nr fetter, toitij 

xxxii The Preface. 

tlje autteitie of 4Bobbc£ toojb., fiut fpctialtp 
pou fyall iearne tl)i£ alto, tftat onre 3io?be 3fc s 
ftiS €lj:ifte, tipti entenbe, ftp ti)i£ autljojitic of 
tlje Stape^ to comfojte tlje troufileb confcien* 
cc^ of tfjem, tfjat after tljeir fiaptifmc, bo fall 
in to fjapnoutf offence*?* 

f o? it i£ not fo eafpc a ttivitQ, to rife agapn 
from fpnn 3 a£ tlje maa and filpnbe toojlbe 
fcoetlj tfjpnfte,, fiut totjen tfje unci aab oure 
faitf) tyall £fekmitye together , tijen in tfjofe 
ftraite£, anb trouble^ of emifaence, toe tjaue 
nebe of ci|c fydpt of fome tretoe mintiter of tfje 
cljurcfje. togprti (a£ it toere in our (toonpngc; 
mape Ipft h$ bp toptf) tlje Uiourbe of 430b, 
ersmfone anb ret'retyc b£- 3U tlje topfe Hpng 
Salomon bofft beclare ftp t|jp£ fentente* 3©o 
to tftat man, toliprf) i£ alone,, fo? toften t)e faU 
lettj, $e ftatft no man to Ipft tjpm fcp agapm 
Stub oure2to?b :3JeTu£ €i>:iftt 3 botlfj rpeafte fo 
often tpme£ in tlje gofpd of tlje autljo?itie of 
tlje feape^ anb Ijatlje abbeb fo great p?ompfe£ 
to tfte fame, tljat it map toel appcre ftp tlje 
earntfmne£ of €ft?ifte£ toourbc£, tjoto careful 
lie toa£ fo? troubled confidence^ anb Ijoto fa* 
tfjcrifo an ejection Ije Ijab to comfojte tlje fame, 
^©ftereof it bnbouteblp folotoetlj, tljat toe Ijaue 
great nebe of tf*i£ comfojte, anb tljat it i£ 
moa)c to fie eftemeb anb fet ftp. j?o? firft of 
a* our fauiour €$ii{k, ficfoje Ije gaue tfjefe 
ftape£ inbebe, Ije psonipTcb to #eter tfjat Ije 

tooulb iimt tljem, faptng. 3 topi 
$%** ftiiu gpue to-ilje, tlje 6ape£ of tlje 

himgbome of fjcauen. ^©Ijat fo 
tutr rtjou fl;alt fipnbe fcpoii eartli , tyal fi? 
ficundc in Ijeaucn, anb toftat fo euer tftou tfjalt 
Icufc fcpon cartfj, tyal fie atfo loufeb in iwauetfc 
^econbarelpc^ €lj?ift boetft teacfje ox, fjotoe 
U»p iJ?aU ^ r ^ *£efc hape^ fiotf) in open anb in 


The Preface. xxxiti 

tmctc tfttrntg. <9f t$t bfe of tfte ftapcjs? in o^ 
$tn fpnne& Cljjift fprafcetf) tftcfc 
ioourDc£* ©ftljP footer trefpace ^at.tfuu. 
agapnft tljc, go anb tell ftpm ftp£ 
faultefiettoenc him an& ttjc alone, if ije fjear 
tlje 3 tftou Ijaft inonne tfip bjctijrr* 23ut pf tjc 
fjeare tfje not, tftcn taftc prt toptfi tJ>e one o? 
ttoo, tftat tpc* tip moutfte of ttoo o? tftje &pt; 
ncfltos?, euern toa^c m r; fxc ntte. g-T ':>. ijtaxc 
not tfjem^teil it tmto tfjecangregat-ion* m fit 
fjeare not tft* congregation^ let iyexn be ton* 
to tfte^ a£ an Jjdfen anto publican* ©crelp 
3; lap tonto pou, brfjat fo etter pc bpnbe on 
cart!?, fl[?a! &r bjnthbe i ft men. 3fnb totfjat 
fbfiKr ;«c !"on i i lartfi ft H 
lien 36nto of it je toft ;iupc 

aub kttttt fpnhe »>n I ijifl gati) 

rattslit b£ ftp | tx&mpte. 

jpoj r^c man, ttjat hm$ fi palfcp 

r faiDtljii. 5 / >cm u * t. .* ute 
a ftebfeft faptf) « r rpi Beg 6 . I s it 

gpitcti tfje. 3ftttsT : a^tpucinpg 
fepnbjmgof fpnhe&.f) I rtoljctfci 

an& itubbnrne 3[el 

toerefclin&c pou . tytrii no iiuse i». 

fpunc. 25ut note bpt»i ufe pon 3<#n »*. 
fitpCj pou tro, pout fpnne a&pfcctft 
tfjat is to fapc, it in n 
,r, oure j&autoun a *ftt ftis .t 

:ticn, gaue tfce i big apofrteg 

(a^ before fje gab p?on<pffD) 'itgtogon 

tbeim, ant» Taping. &utmoWx ijofp gaft, 
tofjofe fpnnes? pc l^all fojgfar; rijep are to?* 

it, #o*;i: fojalhwcfje [amourc 

vmge t£e ftepc^ 
v;e to great comh:t€. 

}e tijr tofr of tli: 
anD lotipnj rameniw rbem 



xxxiv The Preface. 

artf* put tljctnt (a£ it torn) into t$t f)anbe$ 
of ijijaf agoftle^ ana tficir fuccciToj.s, toe ougfjt 
in no topfc to bpfppre tf)i£ grcate autfjo^iiie, 
tufiicljc 4J5oti JjatSj gpucntmto men, 6ut tftanhe» 
fullp to fcfe it. f o? fettotoe t$i£ foj a fuertpe 
gcoti d]il&:cn, tiiat it i$ a fcetp great otfence 
againft 43oti, Iptle to care fo* ftp£ great gpfteg 
anti Benefited Cfjcrefee tofjen toe fal agapne 
to great fpnne& after itat toe are cnc£ &ap* 
tplcD , toe onglpe not to toalfee in a tettm 
recfielefiie^, tijpn&png t%nt out fpnnc£ fee fo^ 
gpuen fcs onelp feetaufe <23o& if merciful (foj 
tifji£ opinion o? toauering imagination, i£ 
mo?e toeafte anti fe&Je, tfytn t§at in tfje feare 
anti fcattaile of tije confeience , it ig aWe to 
ftanti againft tfje Violent to:cc and craftpe af* 
faulted of tf)e fcicfcri) VSm in njis ftgfjt fiettoene 
ma* confftence an& tfie &ekcl, cur great truft 
ants comfo?t i$ tl)t lure too:&e anti toojhe of 
45o&, to:jicf*e mape affertepne fc£ tftat our 
[pnnc£ are fegpuen, tftat i£ to fap, tofjan toe 
ofatcpne fojgpuenc^ of oure fpnne£ anti a&fo^ 
Intion , of tff e minifter$ of t&c cfmrclje , to 
tofsome €iyMt fsatlfj fceliuercfc tfje feaie£, anti 
ftatSj p2ompfeti taping* 2©£ofe fpnnc$ pe tyali 
tojgpue in cart^e, tffcir fpnne£ lie fojgpuen in 
&cauen alfo. 

34\\& t$i$ tfifc i$ to fie re&ouctt, tfiar fome 
men, toijiclje continue in manpfeft anti open 
fpnn, anti go not about to amen&e tljeir Ipte& 
pet tijep toil 6e counted cfjjiften men, anti in* 
tcrp?pfe to receane tlyt fame facramcnte£, tJjat 
otfjer tso, to c#me to tfje tljurc^e, to tosrffjig 
43'otb anti to pjapetoittj otftct* ^uege mufte 
Be toarneti of ttjeir faute£, anti pf tfjep refufe 
to ijeare anti amenfce, tfyen tijep ougfit to 6c 
excommunicate anti put out of tfye tfynfttn 
congregation, tyitii tijep regente an& amm&e 


The Preface. xxxv 

tt)eir Iife£. %cft 6p fti#e manifeft fume aim 
euri crampKc^ otljer men misfit be p c 'ouoke& 
to fco tfje Ipkc anti fo at length many migip 6c 
infecteti, anti tlje €£:iftcn religion Dnppfcti 
anti end fpoftcn of, as tljcugtje it terr'tJjc 
toojft religion,- fojalmucfje a# Cijnftian men 
fljoul&e ttjan IcaOc a fljametitf aim fcngcu:p 
Ipfe- 3tnD fo 6p rfti# meatus ti]t name of 
<0o&, aim 45ct» fjimfclfc., migijr Be I ue& 

amongc tfje tjeacijen people* 3!nt» aftijougije 
tfjofe canons o;mpnarice£ aim tittp, toljicfee 
fie M o tije gofpe!, (anti toere oj&epned 

in ipme paft, to pun^flje fuc&c cpni tranf* 
grcflo:£ aim malefactor; are nolcr t-! onre 
tpme almoft brterfp abolpfijetx aim rafeen a- 
toape, pet fo? ti)i£ c^ufe toe ouggt nor to niU 
pife 02 caft afoape., tt}t aut§o w ?itpr anti bfe of 
ttje Etape$. f a: t£ep tofticy p?efumptuouap 
do caff abap ail pcfeeg; of ereleC 
plinc 02 ajafticement, ana fco let, tfjat fuefj 
ftpnoe of corrections toftic^e ij9f agrcaMe to Vgc 
gofpcl, mape nor he refrojcfc againc, fljail 
ijauc tottfjou: fcoufite *Sot* fo: t£cir umge* 

25ut let fc£ pjape our 3lom Sfcfttf €ii:ifr 3 
tfjat a£ it ijatl) pteafeti i)im to reftojc tenia b$ 
fti£ mode ftlctfcO tnojtie; anti ttjc true tintier^ 
ftan&png o£ tfte fame,, fo alfo §c tepll tooucije* 
faue to rendje anti fentie agapnc to b£, rftefe 
anti fucfjc Ipiic gaoD anD goifomc o*tunancc£, 
agreaMc to §i$ toome. 

$o& to^en a man after Saptifmc fyatft grc- 
uomlp fpnncti , aim tioubtetli inhig confaence, 
tofjctjjcr fte fee in tlyt fouour of feoti o: no v a£ 
oftentpme^ it fjappcnetft) thtn it r&$arfce fo? 
gpm to trufl; to lji£aimi fiare imaginations, 
tfjinfcing on tf|i£ fatgimt* "% hnolB tfjat i 
ftaue fpnnca, hut pet 5 am in tf)i£ opinion, 
tfjat ©55 x$ not fo cruel a 

6 tm 

xxxvi The Preface, 

ti)at ftc fjatfj ftugpuen me* £ o? fudfje an opi* 
mon toitfjout aSoUtic^ tuoj&r, i£ not a treta 
faitlk no: i$ able to ftanbe in tfte baungeroug 
^ftirmptyes of temptation* 2Uut trctoe fait?) 
mud eucr tie ftapeti topon tfje terten toojtie anti 
inourhe of <*3otu $oin «5oti bot^e not fpeafte 
to )&$, lmt§ a bopec founfcpnge out of Jjcauem 
53ut £c fyatfy giuen tfic ftapeg of tfje ftingbom 
of Jjcauen., ants tijc autfjo?itie to fo?gpue fpnne, 
to tlje miniftcrg of tfte cfjurcljc* l©i)crefo?e 
Tet fjim tljat i$ a (inner, go to one of tjjeim 
let fjim imotolege anb confelle i)i£ fpnne, anti 
p?ape fjinv, ttjat accojbpng to &obg commaun- 
Dcmente •> lie tupH gpue f)im absolution anb 
comfojte ftim hurt) tfft too?be of grace anb fop 
gpnene?^ of |}i£ fpnne£* 

5£nti luljen tfte miniftcr botfje fo , tfytn % 
mtaftt ft ebtatf fp to hdtnc, tfjat mp fpnne£ are 
trulp fo c :gpucn me in fieauem 3iinb fuclje a 
faptftc, i$ obit to ftanbe ftronge^ in all jrftp?*, anti a&mte# of our mortal enemp tfte 
bcitc!, fo?afnmc$ea£ it ig buplbeb bpon a fure 
roefce, tfiat is to fap, bpon tfte tettcn toojb 
anb tuoihe of $>ob- fo? Ije tfjat t£ abiohicb, 
fcnotoetfj fo? a furctpc, tljat l)ig fpnnc£ 6c fo?* 
gpnen fttrn bp tlje minifter* 3Enb f)e hnotoetfj 
adureblpe alto, tljat tfie minifter Ijatlj aiu 
ro:itic from <©ob fjimfelfe fo to Do* 36nb 
tfjirbelp Jjc fenotoetfj tfjat<*3ob Ijatljmabe tDt.^ 
p?omife to fji£ minifrer^ anti fapeb to tijcni* 
Co U3I30111 pe fo?gpue fpnne£ bpbn eartlj., to 
ftim aifo tijep tyall fie fo?gpuen in Ijeauen* 
2Bfierefo?e goob cljiTb?cn., gpue goob eare to 
tl)i# Doctrine, anti infjen pour tptmtg bo mahe 
pou afrapeb anti fabbe., tfjen (ehe anD belpcr 
abfolution anb fo?gpucne£ of pour fpnnetf of 
tl?e minifter^, tol)iclje fjauc receaucD a com- 
miffion anD commaunDement from Cftnft 


The Preface. xxxvii 

JpmrelfCj to fogpue men tljeir fpnn*& anb 
tfjen poure confcience.s fl;al fjau* peace, tran> 
guitfitie and quietneg. SSiit fje tljat botfte 
not obep tijig coun&U* tint Srpng ecljcr Stonb 
o? pjouDc^ botf) bifppfe tljc fame., £c (i>ali not 
fpnbe fo?gpuene£ of tji£ fpnne0, neither in 
ijp£ atone goob toouthe&, lio? pet in painefui 
cf)aftpfemente£ of l)i.g frobpc, oj anp ctfter 
tfjpnge., tofjereto 43ob ijatft not jncmpftb rc< 
midion of dnne& 319[)erfo?e bifpnfe net abso- 
lution, fo it ifi tf)c commaunbemnite ants o: 
finance or ©oDj anti tfje fjolp fjrirtt of ^ots 
is? p^efent, anb taufetfi ttjefe tfjmgc^ to fate 
effect in u& anb to too/fte one faliiation* 3Lnb 
t§i$ iff tfje meaning anb plapnc tonbrrfranb* 
pnge, of tljefe toojbc£ of Cfjnfte, topicij pou 
fjearbe fjererofee rcfjerfeb., tofce&c are to;iten 
to tfjentent tftat toe tyoutbe Bcleuc, tftat hrfjat* 
foeuer <©obbe£ minifterjs? bo to \s$ 6n &ab$ 
eommaunbement* are aff nnicftc auaxTea&Je,, 
a£ pf «Sob fjpmfelfe tfjoufbe bo iixt fame, fm 
toijetfter tfje minpfterg bo excommunicato open 
malefactor anb unrepentant perfon£ of ba 
gptoe afifoKution to tfjofe, tofctiei) bt trnlp re- 
pentant foj their fpnnc& anb amenbe tljeir 
ipntff, tfjele atteff of tije miniffer^ Jjaue an 
great pctocr anb autfiontie., anb be confirmeb 
anb ratifieb in tpauth, nff tljougije cure 3Io;bs 
3' €£?ift ftimrdfe ^ab bone ttje fame. 
3lB>Ijerefo:e goob c§i*b:en,, f earnc tfjefe tfiinge£ 
bilpgentlpe. $inb toijen pou 6e ajerftea ftoto 
tonbjeftanbe pou tfie toc2be£ &cfb:c reftcneb t 
pe tyaU anftoere. S\ bo fericuc. tgat to^at fo* 
eucr tfjemimfter-s? of €f|2ift ^ to u£ fin <&ob£ 
commaunbement; either in ertommunicatinge 
open anb imrepentante fpnner& o? in a&fol* 
upng repentant perfon£, all tftefe tfjeiracte^. 
fee of a£ greate autgontie^ anb a£ fuecip emi 

ft % firmed 

xxxviii The Preface. 

firmeti in fytancn, a£pf£foiftefyouftie fpeafte 
tije too?&e$ out of fjeauen* 

^o pe fjaue goofci tfyiltycn, tlje fiegpnnpnge 
anH foundation, of tfje miniftetg of <acfc£ 
toojtie, anti of tf)c autijo:itie of tge ftape£, a£ 
our I02& 3fcfa£ £f)?ift Uiti fitft ojfcepne anti 
inftitute tge fame. €fjc tofjicfje out fauiout 
Ctmft fciiti inftttute anb appointe fo? t$i$ pur^ 
pole, tljat our tonfcience£ mpgfjte tfjerefip fie 
comtojtefc 3 anti affureD of tfte fo?gpuene£ of 
fpmte£, anD to fjaue tfte ineftimafile tf>?efute£ 
of tfje gofpel, *# often oS tee ijaue nefce ttyzte* 
of. €|at toe tfjetefip fieing made ftronge in 
oure faitf) , migftt fo continetoe to tfjeniie of 
out life. 3ln& £e tljat continue^ to tfje enfce, 
i^all fie Tauctu €fte tojjict) gtaunt b£ tfje moft 
merciful <©o& 3taem 

I Have made this Sermon publick again, be- 
caufe I think the Do&rines fet forth in it 
are as beneficial for the Church now, as when 
they were publifhed One Hundred and Sixty 
Years ago. I fay the Do3rines y for in order 
to explain the Power of the Keys, he hath 
treated of the Sacerdotal Mijjion of God's Mi- 
nifters, to whom the Power of the Keys is 
committed, and delivered his Do&rine about 
in feveral Propofitions, as, I. That it is ne- 
ceffary to have Preachers, or Minifters of 
God's moft holy Word. II. That they muft 
not afpire to that high Office, before they 
are called, ordained, and appointed to ir, 
and fent to us by God, III. That except 
they be fo called, and fent, they cannot fruit- 

The Preface. xxxbc 

fully teach, becaufe God doth not work 
with the Preacher, whom he hath not 
fent. Thefe doubts, faith he, might trou- 
ble Mens Minds, if we were not allured, 
that our Lord Jefus Chrift himfelf hath 
both ordained, and appointed Minifters to 
teach us his holy Word. Then after fet- 
ting down the Words , which Chrijl after his 
Refnrreffion fpakp to his Apoftles, John xx. 
22, 23. Receive ye the Holy Ghofl 5 whofe fins 
ye forgive, &c. he tells us, that as many a$ 
believed their Preaching were as fnrely faved, 
as if they had believed Chrift himfelf. After 
whofe Afcenfion, faith he, the Apoftles gave 
authority to other holy Mea to minifter 
God's Word, by laying their Hands upon 
them, aud giving them the Holy Ghoft, as 
they themfelves received the fame Holy Ghoft 
of Chrift to execute the Prieftly Office. Thefe 
fo ordained, he faith >, were indeed, and were 
alfo called Minifters of God, as the Apoftles 
themfelves were. And fo the Miniftration 
of God's Word, which our Lord Jefus Chrift 
himfelf did firft inftitute, was derived from 
the Apoftles unto others after them by Im- 
pofition of Hands, and giving the Holy Ghoft 
from the Apoftles time to our Days. And 
that this was the Confecration, Orders, and 
Dutfion, whereby they at the beginning 
made Bijhops, and Priefts, and that this (hall 
continae ; n the Church even to the World's 
end. Arc whatsoever Rib, or Ceremony 
fa^th been ad4ed more than this cometh of 

t 3 Man % 

xl T#l Pre face. 

Man's Ordinance, and Policy, and is not com- 
manded by God's Word, 

After thus deriving the Orders and Mifflon 
of Bifjops, and Priejis from Chrift to the Jpo- 
ftles, and front them to others, and from them 
again fucceffively to others , unto the Worlds 
end ^ he then proceeds to /peak of the refpeff, 
which is due to them as God's Minifters, and 
what Comfort, and Satisfaction the People ought 
to have in their Miniftration, or Execution of 
their Office. Wherefore (faith he) you (hall 
give due Reverence, and Honour to the Mi- 
nifters of the Church, and (hall not meanly, 
or lightly efteem them in the Execution of 
their Office, but you (hall take tbem for 
God's Minifters , and the Meffengers of our 
Lord Jefus thrift. For Chrift faith in the 
Gofpel, He that hcareth you, heareth me, &c 
And whatfoever they do to you, as when 
tbeyBaptife you, when tbey give you Ab- 
iblution, and diftribute to you the Body, and 
Blood of our Lord Jefus Chrift, thefe you 
fhall fo efteem as if Chrift himfelf in his own 
Perfon did fpeak,, and mini ft er unto you. When 
the Minifters do truly execute their Office, 
you ought to take great Comfort, and to 
confirm your Faith thereby, and in all Temp- 
tations anfv/er your Adverfary the Devil af- 
ter this manner, God hath fent to me one 
of his Minifters, he in the Name, and Place 
of God, hath declared to me the Forgivenefs 
of my Sins, and hath baptifed me in the af- 
furance of the fame, Forafmucb as our Sa- 

The Preface. xli 

viour Chrift in giving the Keys, did fo faith- 
fully, and lovingly put them, as it were, 
into the hands of his Apojiles, and their Sac- 
cejfors, we ought in no wife to defpife this 
great authority, which God hath given unto 
Men. Whatfoever God's Minifters do to us 
by God's Commandment are as much avail- 
able, as if God himfelf (hould do the fame. 
Thefe A&s of the Minifters [Excommunica- 
tion, and Abfolution^ have as great Power, 
and Authority, and be confirmed, and rati- 
fied in Heaven, as much, as though our Lord 

Jefus Chrift himfelf had done the fame.-- 

All thefe Atts be of as great Authority, and 
as furely confirmed in Heaven, as if Chrift 
fhould fpeak the Words out of Heaven. So 
in his Sermon of the Inftruftion of Baptifm. 
By thefe Three [Baptifm, Absolution, and the 
Lord's Supper] God's Minifters do work with 
us in the Name, and Place of God, yea God 
worketh with us to confirm us in oar Faith. 
Our Lord Jefus Chrift faith : Go, and teach 
all Nations, and baptife them in the Name. 
of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy 
Ghoft. This God commanded his Difciples 
to do. Wherefore by the virtue of this 
Commandment, Baptifm doth work in us, 
as the Work of God. For when we be 
baptized in the Name of God , that is as 
much as to fay, as God himfelf ' Jhould bap- 
tife m. ; 

I have fet all this in the Reader's view 
for the honour of Archbifliop Cranmers Me* 

b 4 dory 

xlii The Preface. 

mory, to (hew that when he wrote this Book, 
he could not be of the Opinion, that the 
Form of Church-Government is mutable , that 
there is no d'tflin&ion between a BiJhop f and a 
Priejl, and that a Man appointed to be a Bi- 
fhop, or a Priefl, needs no Confecration by the 
Scripture : EleBion, or Appointment being fuffici* 
ent thereunto, as is faid of him with great Tri- 
umph in the 178 th Page of the Book of the 

Thefe loofe Opinions, which are fo ap- 
parently contrary to what the Archbifhop 
publiihed in this Sermon, that fraudulent 
Writer took from a Manufcript as cited by 
Dr. Stillingfleet in the VIII th Chapter of the 
Second Book of his Irenicum^ tho' Dr. Du- 
rell, who faw the Manufcript afterwards, told 
the World how it was rnanifeft from it, that 
the Archbilhop changed his Opinion, and 
came over to that of Dr. Leyghton*, who 
an anfwer to the Eleventh Queftion afferted, 
that a Bijhop hath authority from God in Scrip- 
ture as his Minijier to ma\e a Priefi, and that 
be had not read, that any other Man had au- 
thority to make a Priejl by Scripture, or kpew 
any Example thereof f And in anfwer to the 
Twelfth he faid : I fuppofe, that there is a 
Confecration required, as by Impofition of Hands : 
For fo we be taught by the Enf ample of the 
Jpojiles. Who, in anfwer to the Tenth Que- 

* Collection of Records in the Third Book of me Eifnop 
of Sarum's Hiftory of the Reformation, p. 237. 
f Ibid. p. 230. 


The Preface. xliii 

ft ion f, he had faid, were made Bijhops, and 
Priejls by Chrifi ■ and that after them the 
Seventy Two Difciples were made Priejls. This 
account of the Archbilhops changing his 
Opinion as to the point of Church-Govern- 
ment, * Dr. Darel afterwards Dean of Wind- 
for gave from the Manufcript itfelf, wherein 
it appeared, that Th. Cantuarhnfis was writ- 
ten with the Archbifhop's own Hand under- 
neath Leightons Opinion, to fignifie his Ap- 
probation of it, and his Sermon, which I 
have here reprinted , (hews that it was 
his final Opnion, and that he thought the 
People were to be inftru&ed in it, as part of 
the Erudition of a Chriftian Man. Dr. Stit- 
fbtgfieet afterwards Biftiop of Worcefier never 
wrote, or that I heard, faid any thing to 
contradift Dr. DureVs account of his Manu- 
fcript all his Life long. And the Biftiop of 
Sarum alfo acknowledges, that the Arch- 
bi(hop did retraft his Opinion, though he 
printed bis Manufcript in another order, 
and method, than the Original is written in, 
contrary to the advice of Dr. Stillingfleet, as 
Dr. Grove told the World in his (huffiing 
Anfwer to Dr. Lowth's Letter to Dr. Stil- 
lingfleeL Which was a Fancy, or rather a 
Liberty in his Lordfhip, which perhaps 
he would cenfure in another Hiftorian : I 
am fure it cannot be juftified in any, and 

\ ib J u • 2*$. 
* Vinaici* Ecckfise Anglican*, fac. cap, 28. p. 226, 327, 


xliv The Pre face. 

in matters of Law, it would be called Alter- 
ing a Record. I mud alfo obferve, that Arch- 
fcilhop Cranmers Book muft be writt^j in 
1547, or fome time before, becaufe it \vas 
printed in 1548. Which alfo farther (hews the 
great miftake of WifoopStillingfleet, when he 
wrote his Irenicnm, in dating the birth of 
his Manufcript from the firft Settlement of 
King Edward VI. as a Paper containing the 
Principles upon which the Reformation pro- 
ceeded in 1547. to the great difhonour of 
our Reformers, and the difgrace of our Re- 
formation, and giving our Adverfaries of 
Rome great occafion to mifreprefent our 
Church to be Erajiian in its foundation, as 
giving the Prince the Power of the Apoftles, 
and other unconfecrat Laymen, authority to 
ordain Biftiops, and Priefts, and to excom- 
municate, aad adminifter the Sacraments, if 
the Law of any Kingdom allomth there- 

But to conclude, the Apoftolical Government 
of the Church by Bifhops was either ordain- 
ed by Chrift, for a perpetual ftanding Inftitu- 
tion, as this Learned Author hath (hewn, 
or as the Men of Latitude, now under the 
Name of Moderation, would make the World 
believe, though it was ordained by him, yet 
it was not ordained, as an unalterable In- 
ftitution, and with an intention to bind all 
Ages t and Nations at all times to it, as an 
indifpenfable Command. If this latter Opi- 
nion be true, then I know no reafoii, why 


The Preface. xlv 

it {hould be kept up any longer in the Church 
of England, where, if it is not neceffary by 
the nature of its divine Inftitution, there are 
fo many plaufible Humane Reafons, why it 
(hould be taken away, whether we refpeft 
the State of Religion at home, or abroad. 
At home it hath been matter of great Con- 
tention for above a Hundred Years, and k 
hath occafioned much Bloodlhed, and coft 
many Lives to maintain it, efpecially that of 
the Royd Martyr, and vaft Numbers are ftill 
uneafie under it, in all the Dominions of the 
Britifh Empire, and ftill endeavour to pull it 
down. Befides it is an hindrance to a more 
perfeQ: Union, and Coalition of the two Mo- 
narchies into one, "it being very defirable to 
that great end, that as both Nations are be- 
come one Kingdom: So they fhould both 
become one Church. Nay I will be bold to 
fay, that the Nation, as things are now, is 
never like to be eafie under it, and therefore 
could I believe it was not a binding indif- 
penfable Conftitution ordained by God, I 
(hould be for facrificing of it to fo many 
Worldly Advantages, and Reafons. Befides, 
like all other Commands, and Inftitutions of 
God, it hath often by the Iniquity of Men 
been an accidental Caufe of many Troubles 
in the World} and therefore were it not for 
the fake of him 5 who ordained it, and re- 
verence to it, as his perpetual Inftitution, I 
{hould be for depofing the whole Order at 
once for that very reafon, which one was 


xlvi The Preface. 

falfely faid to have given in the Houfe of 
Lords, for his being againfi; the Bifhops, 
becaufe Bifhops had troubled the World 
ever fince the time of the Apoftles. And 
then again, if we look abroad among the 
foreign Reformed Churches, which are al- 
molt all Presbyterian, and fome I fear of Lay- 
original, and will not (or as fome to excufe 
them falfely fay cannot) come tip to us, why 
fhould not we condefcend, and go down to 
them, for rhe great advantages we fhould 
have againrt the common Adverfary in a 
perfeft Union, and Harmony in Government, 
and Difcipline, as well as Do&rine, and in 
all other things relating to Chriftianity, as a 
Society, as well as a Se3 .<? If their Govern- 
ment, and Miniftery is as agreeable to God s 
Word, as ours, which retains the Apoftolic?.! 
Superiority 5 and their Mijfion, as valid as 
curs by SucceiTion from the Apoftles, as is fet 
forth in this excellent Book, and in the Arch- 
bilhop's Sermon ^ Why fhould we not refolve 
into an Uniformity with them for fo great 
benefits, if it be lawful for us fo to do. It 
is in vain for thofe, who think their Church- 
Government lawful, to objeft, that our Form 
is not lightly to be alter'd, becaufe it is the 
moft ancient, and was inftituted by the Apo- 
ftles. For can that be faid to be lightly alter'd, 
which is alterd for fuch good Reafons? A- 
gainft which neither the Antiquity, nor Apo- 
Itolical Inftitution of Epifcopacy will be of any 
moment, unlefs it was ordained for the per- 

The Preface. Sthrii 

petual, and unalterable Government of the 
Church. In vain they alfo fay, that our 
Form hath many Advantages above that of 
foreign Churches, which yet many of their 
Writers will not grant. But not to difpute 
that in the Argument I am now maintaining, 
who, were it lawful, would not be willing 
to part with a few private advantages for fo 
great, and publick a Blefling, as perfeQ: Union 
>vith our half Sifter-Churches would be, if as 
we have one Faith: So we had one Form of 
Government, one Million, one Baptifm, one 
Altar, and one Heart, as all the Churches 
wherefoever difperfed throughout the World 
had in the pure primitive Times. Neither 
would it be fufficient to objeft, that their 
Churches are irregularly formed under great 
defects in their Conftiuttion. For as one may 
live fafely, and conveniently in an irregular, 
and defective Houfe, when it is fubftantially 
good, and found $ and would chufe to do fo, 
rather than in a finifhed, and regular Build- 
ing, for Reafons, which would juftifie his 
Choice : So for the great Reafons above- 
mentioned, I think, we ought to change our 
more regular, and perfed,. for their irregu- 
lar, and defective Conftitution 5 if indeed it 
is fafe, found, and good in all its Parts, and 
Materials, as in its Polity, Miffion, and Mi- 
niftrj, and all that depends thereupon. For 
my own part, I fpeak with all the Seriouf- 
nefs of a Chriftian, did I think the Epifcopal 
Form of Ghtrrch-Government mutable, the 


xlviii The Preface. 

Confiderations I have mentioned would make 
me zealous for the changing of it 3 nor can 
I imagine any reafon, why thofe, who think 
it alterable, (hould be for continuing of it, 
unlefs it be, that they are fondly affe&ed, as 
many are apt to be, to old Forms, and Cu- 
ftoms, or perhaps (hare, or hope to (hare in 
the Dignities, and Revenues, which attend 
it in our Church. 

But if the Apoftolical, or Epifcopal Form 
was ordained by Chrift, for the perpetual, 
and unalterable Polity of his Church, as all 
Chriftianity in all Ages believed for Fifteen 
Hundred Years: Then let all the Clergy 
write for it, as this worthy Author hath 
done, expedting the Protedion of their great 
Lord here, and their Reward from him here- 
after, when they mud: give an account of 
their Stewardship, and the Authority he hath 
committed to them for the Government of 
his People. It is their Duty to teach their 
Flocks this fundamental Do&rine of Church- 
Government, and thofe which depend upon 
it, let the Coniequences of them fall upon 
what Perfons, or Churches foever ^ and 
therefore«let them teach them without fear- 
ing to be reproached, as High-flyers, and 
Men of rigid Principles, who have no Cha- 
rity, but are for Damning all but themfelves. 
Thefe are Slanders, and Perfections, which 
thole, who will preach the Truths, or Com- 
mandmcnts of God, muft be content to bear 
from thofe, who cannot endure found Prin- 

The Preface- xlix 

ciples, becaufe they make themfelves obnoxi- 
ous to the Confequences of them 5 and then 
fay, that they who preach them, preach Dam- 
nation to the greateft part of Mankind, andto 
Chriftians as good as themfelves. But I would 
ask thofe, who are wont to talk after this loofe 
manner, if I muft not preach up the Being, 
and Providence of God, becaufe^!/^//?/, and 
Epicureans, who now are no fmall Number, 
involve themfelves in the Confequences of 
a Do&rine, which concludes them all under 
damning Unbelief? Muft I not alTert the Au- 
thority of the Scriptures, and the Certainty 
of Revealed Religion, becaufe it falls heavy 
upon the vaft Number of Drifts, and Sceptich 
among ws, and puts them all in a ftate of 
Damnation > Muft I not preach up the Union 
of the Divine, and Humane Nature in the 
Per Ion of Ch rift, becaufe the Confequences 
of it are feverc upon fo m^iy Avians, Sod- 
mam, and other Unitarians ? Or, not to 
mention the moral Do&rines of Chriftianity, 
muft I not preach up the perpetual Inftitu- 
tion of the Lord's Day, or of Baptifm. and 
the Lords Supper, becaufe fo many negleft, 
or de.fpife, and rejeft the Ufe of them, to 
their own Deftru&ion ? In like manner let ms 
ask thefe Men, if the Clergy muft not preach up 
the Epifcopal Form of Church-Government, 
as a perpetual Ordinance of Chrift, and the 
neceflity of an Epifcopal Million, and Mini- 
ftry, without refpeft loPerfons, or Churches, 
be they never fo many which have rejected 


1 The Preface. 

the divine Inftitution, and ftill wilfully con- 
tinue in the want of it, and ciiereby involve 
themfelves in Confluences, which too many 
Learned, and Worthy Men, under the pretence 
of Charity, have too much endeavoured to 
palliate, and foften,or evade for them^ where- 
as it is much greater, and truer Charity to let 
thofe Confequ^nceS) fall in their full weight up- 
on them, that ihey nay fee their Error, and 
the djn^cr of it by thofe Confequences, and be 
thereupon effe&ually moved to reunite them- 
felves to tie Catholick Church, from whofe 
Doftrines ■ y have departed in every thing, 
t'ldt relates to it, as a Society of drift's 
framing, and thereby juftly brought their 
Ca^l, audi Miffion into queftion, giving as 
&ood, an J learned Men, as any are in the 
World, occaiiori to doubt of their MiSon, 
whether it is valid, or no 5 and by confe 
t;uen:e, whether their Minifters are truly 
Ccci's Minifters, and Meffengers, fuch Mini- 
fters as the Archbifhop fpeaks of in his Ser 
r«v:>:>, who have the true Sacerdotal Miffion, 
and Authority from God to minifter his 
Word , and Sacraments to the People in 
ChrilVs place, and the A&s of whbfe Mini- 
ftry art as valid, as if Chrift himfelf faould 
minifter unto them 5 as being made fo by 
the fame Confecration, Orders and lln&ion, 
by which Bifhops, and Priefts were made at 
the beginning, ^nd are to be made God's 
M' sifters by his appointment unto the end 
of the World It grieves me always, when 

I confider 

The Preface. It 

I confider to what difficulty the Minifters of 
the Presbyterian Churches abroad have beea 
put, to anfwer the Queftions about their 
Millions and what Shifts and Evafions their 
Defenders among us have alfo been put to 
in their attempts to defend it. And therefore 
I muft fay it again, the greatcft, and trueft 
Charity to the Reformed Churches, and the 
whole Reformation, is to exhort their; to 
take the fame Niffion, that we have retain- 
ed, as the only true, and r.cHfputable Mifiioa 
of the Holy Carhclick Church. I think the 
Nature of Chriftian Charity obliges us up- 
on Catholick Principles to write them up 
to our Church, and not as the manner of 
fomo hath been, to write our Church down 
to than ^nd whoever would write fm;h a 
Var&ncfis to them in the common Language, 
and Chrjftian Spirit of Meekntfi, I »-bink, 
he would do a moft charitg^Ie Work y for 
wh * h if :hey did not think themfelves ob- 
lig'd to him, God would certainly reward 
him, and all good Men would praife him 
for ever. What I have faid here, I call God 
to witnefs, I fpeak not out of Ill-will, bur 
out uf pure Love, and Good-will for the fo- 
reign Reformed Proteftants,fbi' whofe Prefer- 
Vjation, if I can judge of my (elf, I could lay 
down my Life, and of whom I fay with my 
whole Heart; as StPatil faid to King Agrippa, 
I vpohU to God, for bis Church's fake, that 
they were not only almojl, but altogether, as w$ 
of the Church of England are* 

c Where- 

lit The Preface. 

Wherefore let the Clergy, without any 
regard to Human Politicks, or ferving Times, 
or fearing the Arm of Flefh, inftruft the 
People in the true Nature, and Original of 
Church-Government. Let them teach their 
Flocks from whom Riftiops have their Au- 
thority over Pricfts, and both Bifhops and 
Priefts their Authority over the People, and 
in whole Name, and Place they abfolve 
them, and preach, and rainifter Sacraments 
to them, and that they are Chrift's Meffen- 
gers, Chrift's Embaffadors, Chrift's Minifters, 
and Chrift's Spiritual Governors to them, and 
over then, in his Kingdom upon Earth. Let 
them remember what St. Paul, St. lgnatim\ 
St. Cyprian, not to mention Hofiut, Athana- 
jtus, Greg.Nazianzen y Chryfojhm, and Ambrofe> 
taught the Chriftian World upon this Sub- 
Jed, and let them preach, and teach the 
fame Principles with primitive Boldnefs be- 
fore the greateft of Men 5 the fame Princi- 
ples, which Archbifhop Cranmcr taught King 
Edward VI. in his Sermon of the Power of 
the Keys 5 and which, as it is evident from 
thai Sermon worthy of his great Name, as a 
Biftiop, a Reformer, and a Martyr, were not 
only jis Principles, but as is alfo evident 
from the Preface of the Reformers before our 
old Ordinal, the Principles of the Reforma- 
tion, upon which it began, and proceeded, 
and upon which T truft; it will ever continue, 
and fubfift 5 though now it hath more, and 
more powerful Enemies in number and kind, 

The Preface. liii 

than ever it had before. Wherefore as it is 
the Duty of the Clergy to defend the Prin- 
ciples upon which Church-Government, and 
their own Million, and Authority is truly 
founded, as well as the true Faith, and to 
inftrudi the People in them : So is it more 
efpecially necefiary they fhould do it now, 
when Men take the liberty to fpeak, and 
write with the Spite of Devils againft Priefts, 
and Prieftbood, and take delight without 
Truth, Wit, or good Manners, and what i c 
more, without fear of Punilhmem, to revile 
and ridicule both. Let them affure them- 
felves God will aflift them, if they will be 
unanimous, and labour in I 1 a Work. 

He will contend with thtm againft their Ene- 
mies, in defence of them, ana his own In^ 
but he will rn ithaut 

them. He will moil: al be r^eir Se- 

but he will not be tb^r Champion to 
fight alone for them. Nor mufl they ex- 
that he will work Mil for them, 

^n they'll do nothing for themfelves* 
will not fbpport them, and the Church 
h them>if they will nor do their own 
ipport both. ' herefore lettbecn 
/hat they have, $ afids 

jiiraofities, Strife, and. Contentions, and 
Names of Parties, agree as one Man to main- 
tain Sacerdotal Orders, and Authority 
\ thofe whe federate with rhe 
Powers of Ut it: Not ovay againft 
ilialiftsofF . ar ! p lood, but againft 


Hv The Preface. 

Principalities, and Powers, and the Rulers of 
the Darknefs of this World, and wicked Spi- 
rits in High Places. To that end let not the 
Rich among them defpife the Poor, nor the 
High the Low, nor thofe who are in greater 
Stations, thofe who are in lefs, or perhaps 
in none at all 3 let no Party among them be 
ftiff, fupercilious, or untra&able, of refufe to 
offer, or receive Propofals of Agreement from 
the others as impra&icable $ but let them unite 
againft the common Enemies of the Church, 
and Priefthood,as formerly the Homooujians of 
oppofite Partie? heartily did againft the com- 
mon Enemies of the Faith. To that end alfo, 
if any among them have favour'd Principles 
in any degree deftru&ive, or hurtful to the 
Apoftolical Government of the Church, as per- 
haps Archbilhop Cr. once did, let them follow 
the great Example of his Humility in retrac- 
ing their Error* and coming over, as he did, 
to thofe Principles on which the Churches 
of ChriO were firft formed, and ours reformed 
uoon the Prophets, and Apoftles, Jefus Chrift 
himfelf being the chief Corner-Stone, It is 
high time to joyn Hands to this good Work, 
and God, and good Men expeft it from us$ 
and he that hath the Key cf David, and 
holdeth the Stars of the Firmament of the 
Church in his right Hand, looks on to fee 
what they will do, and will in Judgment 
hnng an Eclioie upon them, or perhaps let 
them fall firft into the uttermoft Contempt, 
and then into utter Ruine, if truftiqg ro Hu- 


Kiane Policies, and leaning on Reeds, which 
mil at I aft go Into thtir Hands, and pierce them, 
tbey (hall negleft fo good, fo needful, and 
fo feafonable a Work. Lee them remember, 
what no vulgar Perfon once faid, What hath 
been, may be 5 and let all good Chriftians of 
the Church of England, and the Clergy more 
efpecially, remerabei the Admonitions which 
the Spirit gave by St. John unto Seven once 
glorious Churches, which with many more 
as firm and famous, as theChutrch oi England, 
he hath let go into Captivity, AftU&iora, and 
Servitude, and remov'd their Candleftkks jal 
of their places, becaufe they ivete Luke- 
warm, or fufFer'd falfe Doctrines, and falfe 
Prophets among them, or conniv'd at Elai- 
phemers, or negle&ed Difci] . foine 

refpe&s or other would not do r;»ur 6rft 

VVhile I was fpeaking a <ua. g»<-<tc, and 
mod: worthy Peer,. Edward Eivi of Clarendon, 
ittd his imperfeft Letter, which 1 mentioned, 
as written in his own Hand, i fnould have ac- 
quainted the Reader, that hib two tlighi Ho- 
nourable S^ns, Henry EarLof Clarendon, and 
ILamerice Earl of Rochejio will attcft the Loi- 
ter to have been found aiiiong the 1 apcrt, 
which he left behind him. and ro be an 
Original of his Writing. And i cannot but 

h for the fake of the ; of England* 

to which he was fo great an Ornament, and 
in whofe Communion he lived, end died 
upon the Principles laid down in this Boc 


Ivi 7he Preface. 

and in Archbifhop Cranmers Sermon, that his 
Lordfhip had lived to finifli it. And to what 
I have already publifhed of it, 1 believe, it 
will not be unacceptable to any true Son 
of the Church to prefent the Publick with 
the laft Periods of it, where it breaks of: 
Having now , faith he , anfwer'd your whole 
Letter, at haft as fully, as you could expect it^ 
it is not in my power to abftain from asking 
you, how it comes to pafs, that you r and many 
el her grave, and learned Men, who have not 
yet outgrown the Scats, and deeper Marks, which 
yon received from -'he Presbyterians, in the 
time of their Domination, without the leaft In- 
fiance of Brotherly Compajflon, or Humanity , 
but wen confiderd by them, as ViSims given 
into their Hands by the immediate Bounty of 
God himfelf to be offered in Sacrifice for the 
expiation of the Offences of the Epifcopal Party 

in their former -. Here the great Man 

was going to give an account of the Pref- 
byterians Moderation, and it may be of their 
Principles 5 but God was pleafed not to let 
him proceed farther, but to deliver him from 
all his Pains,, and tranflate him from this 
World, which was a place' of Labour, Suf- 
ferings, .and Perfections to him, to the Bo- 
fom, or Bay of Abraham, which fecures the 
Faithful to righteous Caufes from the Storms, 
and Tempefts, which evil Spirits, and un- 
righteous Men raife againft them, in Ever- 
mg Reft, and Blifs. I wifh my Pen were 
able to give as -true, and juft a Character of 

The Preface. I vii 

him, as his hath given of many others in 
his immortal Hiftory of the Rebellion , and 
Civil Wars in England* and then, I a-ni fure, 
it would be as bright, and glorious, as thofe 
of the beft, and greatefi: Men, that this 
Church, or Nation ever bred. But it mull 
be a very matter] y Hand, that can make a 
Pifture truly worthy of him, and therefore 
I will not preiume fo much is to attempt it 5 
but only fay, that as I am one of thofe, who 
have a Veneration for fris Memory to the 
higheft degree^ So I cannot out vitii ior the 
Honour, and Happlnefs of the Church, and 
State, that the Peerage c Country may 

always abound with Nobles of his great 
Abilities, and Courage to ferve, and ictend 
both. • 

From the Extrad I have gr of his 

Lordfiiip's Letter, it is plain, that it was not 
for By-Ends, or Worldly Profpfefts, or f oiitick 
Reafons of State, but out of pure Ccafci- 
ence, that after he had been .u the Temples 
of Montpel/ier to fatisfie his ( ne re? 

fus*dj when at Rouen to go to the Tempte 
at gueviliy.* For it* is plan hints 

gave his Friend, to T 1 bought tet 

to write with much Caution, and RtJcrve* 
he was not fatisfied v/ith the Mijfion 
of the Minifters of the French Reformed 
Churches: Of which it carrot be faid thai- 
it was only imperfect, and c . v became 
a Mijjiori, or Commijlon, be it iron] God, or 
frc : who have Power yagive it, ouft 

Lviii The Preface. 

be perfeft, or none all. He doubted whether 
their Minifters were God's Minifters, that is 
Minifters fent by God to aft in his Name, 
and to adminifter the Power of the Keys, the 
Preaching of the Word, and the Holy Sacra- 
ntents by his Authority, and in his ftead, ac- 
cording to Archbifhop Cranmers Doftrine, 
though he affigned other Reafons lefs invi- 
dious, yet it is evident this was the true 
Reafon, for which he refufed co go to the 
Temple at guevilly, and for which, or the 
Sufpicion of which, I may prefume it was, that 
the famous MonfieurC/We invey'd fo fevere- 
}y againft him, as I have fjelfe where declared. 

Let me farther obferVe, that as to Archbi- 
fhop Cbanmers Sermon, theReader will find the 
Do&rines therein contained agreeable to the 
Anfwers be return'd to feveral Qpeftions with 
ofher Learned Men in the Cottonian MS. Cleo- 
fatra E. 5. printed by Mr. John Strype in his 
Appendix to the Memorials of Archbifhop 
Cranmer, Num. XXVIII. p. "52. Of which I 
1 thought fit to take notice 5 and if in this 
Preface I have done any Service to the Me- 
mory of that great Man, and Reformer, who 
Jived in very difficult, and trying times, efpe- 
cially in vindicating of him from thofe unjuft 
Imputations, by which he hath been mifre- 
prefented, as to the Principles, upon which 
he proceeded in the Reformation, I (hall think 
my Pains well beftowU Qmp ffi ^ 

|| Preface to T\yoTreacifes: Of the Chriftian Prieft- 
hood, and Dignity of the Epifcopal Order. Load. 1707. X H 5 



Chap.1. *T~ l /£ Qaufex why the Hierarchy '., ra; 
Ji ' Univerfa/ly Re Page' i 

Cjjap. II. Obfervations upon h State rf t^e Que- 
Jim. p.' T- 

Chap. III. A General Yroof \ thai the Hierarchy is 
of Livine^ and Aptftoljcal i n } - p. 19 

Chap. IV. General Proofs eft tie H . >. , b V>af4 $ 
the DifiinSion of the Degrees in the $1 ijfry % in 
the P erf on of the Apeftles. p I 

Chap. V. Divers Proofs^ that in th \ tie cf the 

Apoftks there were %';fhop$ } diftingiufl/cipom the 
other Minifters, and ejiab/ijbd by {hem. p. 41 

Chap. VI. 4 particular Proof of the Apofiolicalln- 
fliiution 'of<Epifcop#cy in the P erf on r fSr. James 
Bifhop of Jeiufaiem. p, 46 

Chap. VII. A particular Proof of the Apofiolical In- 
ftitution of Epifcopacy\ and its Succejjion^ in the 
P erf on of St. Simeon Bifhop cf Jerufalem. p. 56 

Chap. VIII. A particular Proof 0} the Apofiolical 
lnflitution of Epifcopacy^ in the' Pcrfon of St.Ti* 
fncthy Bifhop of Ephefus. 


The Contents. 

Ch a p. IX . A particular Proof of the Apoftolical ln- 
ftitution of Epifcopacy, in the P erf on of St. Titus 
Biftjop of Crete. p. 7 7 

Chap. X. An Explication of fome Paffjges of the 
New Teftament^ and the Father s, which are per- 
verted to overthrow the DiftinSion of the Degrees 
in the Miniftry. p. 87 

Chap. XL Remarks upon fome Paffages of St. Je- 
rom, which feem to be contrary to the Hierar- 
chy, p. 93 

hap XII. The Teftimonies of the Apoftolical Fa- 
thers concerning the Hierarchy. p. 1 16 

Chap.^XIII. Divers Proofs of the Continuation of 

. the Hierarchy in the Church ^ and that there 

wa<f no Innovation made in the DiftinUion of the 

Degrees^ in the time of Hyginus Bifhop of 

Rome- p. 129 

Chap. XIV. A Proof of the Eftabhftiment of Epif 
copacy in the Church of Rome, and that it was 
in Ufe there during the fir ft Century. p. 143 

Chap. XV. Proofs of the Eftablifhment of Epif co- 
pacy by the Apoftles in the other Churches •, and 
that they had the fame Government with that 
of Rome, and Jerufalem, during the fir ft Cen- 
tury, p. 153 

Chap. XVI. Wherein in proved^ that the Hierar- 
chical Government continued the fame in the 
Second Century^ as in the Fir ft. p. 161 


The Contents. 

Chap. XVII. Wherein is proved, that the Difiirs- 
tlion of the Degrees in the Miniftry continued 
the fame in the fecond Century as in the firftf. 

p. 1 80 

Chap. XVIII. Wherein is proved, that the Hierar- 
chical Government continued the fame in rbt 
third Century, as in the ftrji, and fecond. 

p. 192 

Chap. XIX. Wherein the feme Proof is continued, 
concerning the Hierarchy, and the DiftinQion oj 
the Degrees in the Miniftry^ n the third Cen- 
tury, p 2G$ 

Chap. XX. The Conclufion. p, 218 



PAge4. line 24. dele an. 1. 36. dele 2 d tke., P. 5^. 1. 19. read 
Nicephorus Calltftus. P. dtf. 1. 7, r. refide. P. 67. 1. 18. 
r. fo ffow. P. pe. I. 34. r. H/ifo. P. 10.7. 1. 26, dele in. P. 113. 
1. 1. r. Bucolus, P. 1 84. 1. 1 . inliead of pot. r. out. P. 1 8p. 1. 1 o . 
r. aiPreacher, 1. 13. dele For. P. 190. marg.i. 3. r. /firm. P.afc^t 
1. d. put a v after Epifcopal. P. 205. marg. 1. 3. r. Lat. P. 207. 
L 6, r. Faftious. P. 212. 1. 1 &. put an * to writes. P. 218. 1. 2. 
t.wdo. P. 224. 1. 6. infteadof great, r.fome. 

t HE 

C i ) 


Divine Right 



The Caufes why the Hierarchy is not 
^Universally Received. 

IPropofe to my felf, with God's Affiftance, to 
explain, and determine in this Treatife a 
Queftion-, which, though if be of the great- 
elt "Neceflity and Confequence, yet is not fo 
Relifhing to ail Protepants, either at home or 
abroad: Some looking upon the Hierarchy in the 
Church as a Mark of the Beaft, and a piece of 
Antichriftianifm. As we are all by the Reforma- 
tion come out of Rome^ which at the time of that 
glorious Work* appeared, as to her outfide, like a 
Triumphant Queen upon Earth ^ whatever has the 
Air of her difpleafes and fcandalizes thefe Men, 
They are againft all Ecclefiaftical Superiority, 
without confidering the Original Conftitution of the 

B Church, 

2 The Divine Right of 

Church, and to whom our Saviour committed the 
Government of it. It may be truly affirmed, that 
the Republican Spirit is the predominant Principle 
in almoft ail the Proteftant States *, where every 
one would fain live according to his Fancy, and 
where the Clergy is allow'd to bear little or no 
Authority. This Democratical Genius is the caufe 
of fo many Se£ts and Congregations -> which at this 
Day divide, and tear in pieces all the Reformed 
Churches in Europe, For if Epifcopacy was again 
univerfally Eftablifh'd, it would be no very difficult 
matter to bring Men back to the Unity of the 
Spirit ; to reduce the Sectaries, and other Refra- 
ctory Perfons to Obedience •, and by the exercife of 
Difcipline, to hinder the Tares from mixing with 
the good Grain. The People would of courfe na- 
turally and freely comply with the inferiour Clergy ^ 
and theft being reftrained by a fuperiour Authority, 
would beware of railing Se£ls, or making Innova- 
tions in the Doftrine of the Church, now mifera- 
bly corrupted with damnable Herefies, for fear of 
being caft out by ignominious Excommunications. 
But the Iniquity of the Times caufing Men to look 
upon the Hierarchy as a formidable Power, it mutt 
be confefs'd, that Libertinifm prevails upon the 
Minds of moft ^ who would rather have a Popular 
Government, or tt> fpeak more properly, a Shadow 
of Government, than be under an Epifcopai Difci- 
pline , which fhould keep .every one within the 
bounds of his Duty, and make the Inferiours fub- 
mit to their Superiours, according to that Precept 
of St. Paul, Heb.xiii. 17. Obey them that have the 
rule over you , and fubmit your f elves. 

But to difcourfe m<3re diftinQly of 
f^T No dl f S t ^ le ^aufes, wnv tne Hierarchy is not 
%£kttei5k- univerfally received: I obferve thefe 
■rarefy. Four general ones, viz. 1. The Pre- 

judice of Birth, and early Education. 

2. The 

Episcopacy AJferted. 5 

2. The Spirit of Independency and Latitude. 3. The 
Paflion of Ambition. 4. The little Acquaintance 
Men have with the Hiftory of the Primitive 
Church 5 by means whereof fome are wholly Igno- 
rant of the Conftitution of the Chriftian Church, 
and others take up with a very imperfect and faife 
Notion of ir, for want of applying themfelves to 
the Study of the ancient Ecclefiaftical Writers. 

The firft Caufe, which is the Pre- 
judice of Birth and Education, is fo 1. Caufe^ 
prevalent in this, as in all other things, 7 ) e J n ) u<iKe , 
that it draws the Mind after it whi- f J^. 
therfoever it pleafes. We are fo led 
by this, as generally to believe, that any Church 
which has not the fame Form of Government and 
Worfhip with that we profefs, and to which we 
have been brought up from our Infancy, cannot be 
a true Church. A Bifhop at the Head of a Clergy, 
is a Monfter to thofe who have not feen fuch a 
fight in their own Country, or who have been pre- 
judiced againft it by Education. It is even a Crime 
with fome Men to call the Body of Minifters a 
Clergy, If we fhould change the Term of Convoca- 
tion^ or Synod^ into that of Council^ we fhould not 
be underltood by the common People. To Preach 
with the Head uncover'd, is, if fome may be be- 
lieved, not to deliver the Word "of God like a Mi- 
nifter, and an AmbaiTador of Chrift. And if a cer- 
tain Method is enjoined in the Confeffion of Sins, 
in the Reading of Scripture, and in the manner of 
Payings or a nVd Liturgy is prefcrib'd, it is a 
ftrange Service, fome cry out, or a ttinting of the 
Spirit. Becaufe the Church has retained fome 
decent Ornaments and Ceremonies in her pub- 
lick Miniftration 5 as the Surplice, the Crofs in 
Baptifm, Kneeling at the Sacrament of the Lord's 
Supper, and the like, which refemble fuch Ufages 
in the Romifh Communion ^ the DiiTenters are 

B 2 taught 

4 The Divine Right of 

taught from their Childhood to exclaim againft 
them, as Popifh, Superfluous, and Idolatrous-, and 
therein they are fure to follow the Prejudice of 
their Education. But if Men are thus offended at 
things of little moment, what Convulfions would 
they feel in their Souls, if they were to renounce 
the holy Difcipline, which they confider as their 
Fofter-Sifter, to embrace another ! We fometrmes 
flretch things to fuch a degree of Folly by this 
means, that in changing our outward method of 
Worfhip, we think we change our whole Religion. 
' All Miniflers are Equal in Holland, Switzerland, 
; Geneva, and fome other Reformed Countries -, 
: they were fo lately amonglt the Proteftants in 
' France •, and continue fo amonglt thofe that fe- 
parate from the Epifcopal Church in this K:ng- 
1 dom : Say our Difienting Adveifarles. It is pe- 
; culiar to the Papifts to have Bifhops at the 
; head' of their Clergy. I would not part with 
: the Difcipline, wherein I was bred and born, 
• for the World : And I would venture my Life, 
; rather than fubmit to a new Form of Govern- 
; ment in the Church. Thus do Men talk, when 
hey are prepoffefs'd by the influence Qf an Educa- 
ion } which keeps them from Reafoning juftly, and 
difcerning Truth from Falfhood : They are incapa* 
ble of believing that to be good, which they have 
not feen and experienced. Unhappy Principle ! 
which holds them fait to /their Rock, like the 
Wretch in the Fable, and deprives them of the na- 
tural life of their Reafon, which was given the.m 
to diftinguifh between Good and Evil, Truth and 
Falfhood. How many, by this fatal Prepoffeffion, 
fall into Error and Deltru£tion ! Le\ them there- 
fore put off this Prejudice, and fairly examine, 
whether the Hierarchy be good or evil, and the 
Epifcppacy ancient or modern in the Chriftian 
Church. Truth is not ty'd to a particular Coun- 

* try 

Episcopacy AJferted. 5 

try or Congregation, but is found out every where 
by them that fearch after it fincerdy. In the mean 
time, let it not be thought fo great a Wonder, 
that thole who have fuck'd in the Errors and Su- 
perftitions of Rome from their Birth, are wedded 
to the Opinions they have firft imbib'd : Since 
iuch as know the Truth, fuffer themfelves to be 
corrupted, and led away by this Prejudice. It is 
as a fecond Nature, and cannot be put off without 
great Violence. 

The Spirit of Independency and 
Latitude, which is the fecond Caufe } 2 - ^ u f et f 
mentioned, is no lefs an Enemy to 4^™/ 
the Hierarchy. And the Reafon of it and Latitude. 
is plain, viz. Becaufe it is directly 
oppofite to it. For this admits of little or no Su- 
periority ^ which yet is a neceflary Ingredient, and 
included in the very Notion of Epifcopaq^in the 
Church, whereby the Government is veiled in a 
Superiour : Whereas Independency and Latitude re- 
quire Equality every where. As this Spirit is Na- 
tural to Man fince the Fall, fo it is likewife Domi- 
neering, and cannot brook a Superiour without Re- 
gret and Impatience. I may fay farther, that the 
Chriftian CEconomy, being an (Economy of Liber- 
ty, it gives occafion to depraved Men to turn good 
things into bad, and to change the happieft Free- 
dom into the mod fharpeful Licentioufnefs. There 
is no Religion in the World, under which the 
People are more Matters of their Wills, than the 
Prbteftant. And though perhaps they are fo but 
too much, it looks at this time as if they intended 
to ufe their gtmoft Efforts to caft off all Eccle- 
fiaftical Yoke. Since then this feems to be the 
Natural Genius of Protectants, who are nor under 
the Hierarchy, it is no wonder if Epifcopacy is fo 
ftrongly oppofed, which would have every one 
keep to his Station in the Church, and thelnfe- 

3 3 ! fiorn 

6 The DiviNERiGHTfljf 

riour depend upon, and be led by his Superiour. 
But who does not fee, that this Independent and 
Latitudinarian Spirit is vicious, and that it tends 
to run things into Confufion ♦, and that if the Peo- 
ple are animated with it, it is becaufe they do not 
care to be governed by a Superiour Power ? Inde- 
pendency and Latitude then is one of the Caufes 
why Epifcopacy, which requires a Dependency, is 
not generally received by Protcitants 5 and that 
becaufe there is no Religion in the World, un- 
der which the People would be io abfolute in 
their Ways. 

The Paffion of Ambition is the 
3. caufe. third Caufe which fets Men againft 
Ambition. the Hierarchy, and endeavours to per- 

fuade them to reject it. But it pro- 
ceeds in this Defign with Cunning •, fhifting that 
upon another, which is proper to it felf} and con- 
demning Epifcopacy by that which condemns it 
felf. It will not admit of eminent Degrees in the 
Church, for fear the Minifters fhould climb up 
too high, and Lord it over God's Heritage. That 
is the Foundation, or rather the Pretence of our 
Adverfaries Clamouring. Epifcopacy , fay they, 
is attended with Ambition and Vanity^ which is the 
Tlague of the Miniftry. But I affirm on the con- 
trary, that that pretended Humility, which they 
make a (hew of, in afferthjg, that the Minifters 
fhould ^ be equal^ is Ambition it felf $ and that the 
Equality for which they contend, arifes but from 
a Spirit pufPd up with Pride and Infolence. For 
what is the reafon, why they will not bear with 
an eminent Paftor above them ? It is becaufe they 
would equally (hare the Government with him : 
If there is a Bifhop in a Church, what is mod 
fplendid in the Adminiftration, is in his hands, and 
they would willingly partake with him. This is 
a pure EfTeft of Ambition : As if all Men in Or- 

Episcopacy Ajferted. y 

ders' were equally qualify 'd to fie at the Helm, and 
had the fame Talents to feed, govern, and protect 
the Flock ! And yet, in their Judgment, a Bi(hop 
ought to have no more Authority than they ^ and 
their Undemanding^ for ought they know, may go 
as far as his. This Conceit proceeds from an ill- 
grounded Preemption in them. And therefore it 
is not the People, as we diftinguifh them from the 
Clergy , wno are the moft oppofite to Epifcopacy -, 
they would foon come off of this Prejudice againft 
it, if the Minifters, as they are vulgarly cali'd, 
did not foment it ^ They do not much trouble their 
Heads about the Government of the Church : Pro- 
vided they have Teachers accotding to their own 
Hearts, who Preach well, all is right. They ars 
then the Minilters themfelves, who are the great- 
eft Enemies of the Hierarchy ; becaufe, being egg'd 
on by a Principle of Ambition, they wouldhave an 
equal fhare in the Rights and Privileges of it^ and 
that no other fhould have more Authority than they. 
Which is the Reafon why they proclain it every 
where, That the Minifters ought to be Equals and that 
Superiority amongftjbem, i* downright Tyranny and 
Usurpation : After this manner, making the Pretence 
of an humble and popular Parity ferve to their own 
Ends. I except from this Cenfure thofe Modeft, and 
Learned Men of the foreign Churches, who tho 3 they 
fubmit to another Form, yet fpeak honourably of the 
Epif copal, and when Occn Son is given, fubferibe free- 
ly to it, blaming their Brethren, who have .written 
againft it. For in fhorr it is evident, that the Bo- 
dy of the Minifters, whofe Judgment it is, that the 
Government^ of the Church belongs to ail equally, 
arc direft Enemies of Epifcopacy ; and that more 
by a motive of Ambition and Preemption, than 
any Knowledge they have of the Difcipline of the 
Apoftles, and Primitive Chriftians who followed 

B 4 And 

8 the DivikeRighto/ 

And indeed the Fourth Caufe is, 

4. caufe. that they do not apply themfeives,. 

Tfc little M- as they fl^y t0 the Study of the 

iTZhthe Ecciefiaftical Hiftory of the Apoftles 
iiifiory of the times, and thofe that immediately 
Prim, church, fucceeded. They believe, or at leaft 
the Laity does, that the Chriftian 
Church has had always the fame Face, which they 
now behold with their Eyes 3 and that whatever 
their Difcipline is, it is perfectly confonant with 
the Apoftolical. Then frame to themfelves an Idea 
of the Government of the Primitive Church, con- 
formable to what they are born in -, and that is 
enough to determine the Point : As if that ancient 
Conftitution were naturally imprinted in all our 
Minds, and we had no need to confuit carefully the 
Hiftoiians of thofe Times, to know what they fay 
of it. It is true, the New Teftament is the only Au- 
thentick Record we have to juftifie the true Govern- 
ment of the Church, as to its Original. But fince 
all are not agreed, as to what it delivers concern- 
ing this ^Article % the one maintaining, that it Efta- 
blifhes it*, and the others, that it Overthrows it 7 
whence can we borrow more Light of what was 
done in this refpect, than from the Accounts of 
thofe rlrft Ages > For there we may fee, by the 
Practice of the Church, what kind of Government 
Jefus Chrift directed, and the Apoftles fettled in 
it ^ and what was the Form oT the Difcipline they 
left to it,- and would have continued after their 
Deceafe. It would be too wild an Aifertion to fay, 
that by the Writings of the NcwTeftament we can 
perfectly underftand the whole Syftern of the Apo- 
ftolical Adminittration, and what Power they exer- 
cifed in all the Churches they founded upon all 
occafions. How many things are there which they 
did, but which we are ignorant of > And what 
different meafures did they take in the Manage- 

Episcopacy Ajferted. 9 

ment of their Affairs, to compafs their ends, 
^hereof we have no account in their A£ts, or elfe- 
where ? They were made all things to all Men^ as 
fays St. Paul of himfelf, 1 Cor. ix. 22. (and the 
fame may be applied to the reft) that they might 
by all means jave fome. We even fee, that in 
fome Churches they injpyn the Obfervation of 
certain Ceremonies of the Law, which they for- 
bid in others : An evident fign of a Difcipline 
not yet fix'd, and which was to be order'd ac- 
cording to the Exigency of the Times. What do 
we know, whether every Chriftian Church had the 
fame Form of Government in all refpe&s ? For my 
part, I am apt to believe, that there was a diverfuy 
in this. Only the Apoftles had Fundamental Prin^ 
ciples, and General Maxims of Ecclefialtical Go- 
vernment, which they held faft, and according to 
which they ruled the whole Chriftian Church. 
And they are thofe* Fundamental Principle 
General Maxims, which we have laid down in the 
New Teflament^ arid wh ; ch the Apoftles have de- 
liver'd to be the Model for the Ages to come, So 
then the New Teftament contains in it the Sub- 
fiance and Conftitution of the Ecclefiaftical Go- 
vernment, viz, its Bafes and Foundations ^ but not 
all its Formalities and Obfervances, which were in 
greater Number, even in the time of the Apoftles, 
and before their Death, t than we find them in their 
Books. Jefus Chrift^then, and the Apoftles, ha- 
ving laid down the Fundamentals of the Church- 
Government and Difcipline^ fince we are nor a- 
greed upon the Nature of thofe Fundamentals, 
what can we do better, in order to difcover the 
Truth, than tb inftruft our felves by the Senfe, and 
Practice of the Primitive Church ? I muft confefs, 
1 f mother Form of Ecclefiaftical Government was 
prelcribed in Scripture, the Example of the Church 
afti not ;o perfaade us to a thing which we fee 


l o 7he D I v I N £ R I G H T of 

to be contrary to the Divine Revelation. But fo 
it is not, nor now fo much as pretended by our 
Adverfaries. In a Controverted Point, as this is, 
let the Scripture be plain or obfcure about Epifco- 
pacy^ fince we are not agreed upon it, we muft 
feek out the Senfe of the Precept in the Practice, 
and juftifie the LawsJefusChrilt, and the Apoftles 
have left, by the Obedience their Difciples and 
immediate SuccelTors have paid them. For to go 
about to overthrow what the Apoftles, and their 
Succeffors after them, by a conftant Imitation, have 
done, upon the Allegation of fome Paflage which 
we underftand not, or diftort according to our Ima- 
gination ^ is plainly to deceive our felves, and do 
violence to the Truth. Let thofe therefore that 
are puzled, or prepoffefs'd about this matter, en- 
quire into the former Ages^ let them turn over the 
Records of the ancient Times ^ let them meditate 
upon what the Primitive Fathers have written ^ 
and let them make Chriftian Antiquity familiar to 
them. And then, having their Eyes open and 
found, they will clearly perceive, that the Hierarchy 
is contained in the New Teftament^ and that Epif- 
copacy was in ufe in the Chriftian Church during 
the three flrft Centuries, wherein the Bifhop was 
always diftinguifh'd from the reft of the Clergy, 
as being their Superiour : Which is my chief Defign 
in this Treatife to prove. 


Episcopacy Averted. 1 1 

i. Observation. 
That Epifcopacy 
is of Divine and 
Apoftolkal In- 


Observations upon the State of the 

TO put this matter to its full Light, it will be 
neceflary to make feme general Obfervarions, 
and lay down fome Principles concerning the Scare 
of this Queftion^ whereby it may appear, whac 
is in Controverfie, and what is not^ and whether 
the Point be well proved, or not. 

The firft part of this Queftion, re- 
lating to the Inftitution of the Hie- 
rarchy, or to fpeak more intelligi- 
bly, Epifcopacy : Firft, I affirm, that 
Epifcopacy is of Divine and Apofto- 
lical Inftitution. For the clearing of 
which Aflertion, I muft explain what I mean by D/- 
v'me Inftitution, and in what fenfe Epifcopacy may- 
be faid to be of Divine and Apoftolical Inftitution, 
A thing then may be faid to be of Divine Infti 
tution three ways, or in three Senfes. 
i. Inafmuch as God appoints, and 
ordains it with his own Mouth. 
Such are the Doclrines of Morality 
and Religion, which God has re- 
vealed, and injoyned Mankind to 
embrace, by his Son 'our Lord Jefus 
Chrift. 2. Inafmuch as it is fet forth 
and delivered by Men, who are Di- 
vinely Infpired h as arethofe feveral 
Precepts and Ordinances, which the 
Prophets, and Apofties have declared to Men from 
God, and by his Inflation •, what they have re- 
ceived from him, and thereupon delivered, is of 
Divine Inftitution j becaufe it is he himfeif that 
has immediately *commandid it. 3. Inafmuch as 


Three Senfes of 
Divine Inftitu- 
tion ; as God 
appoints a thing 
himfeif i as it 
is fet firth by 
Men divinely 
irpired-^ as it 
is grounded on 
a Divine Com- 

1 2 The DivineRight of 

it is grounded upon a Divine Commifiion ^ as the 
Authority of Preaching the Word, and Admini- 
ftring the Sacraments, the Power of the Keys or 
Spiritual Jurifdi&ion , and the like. I fay then, 
that Epifcopacy is of Divine Inftitution in thefe 
three Senfes, at leaft in the two laft^ if there is 
any caufe to difpute the firft, which I do not be- 
lieve. For if Jefus Chrift has appointed it in 
his Gofpei to be the Government of the Church, 
as I doubt not to make it appear ^ it is paft Con- 
troverfie, that it is of Divine Inftitution ^ fince it 
Is the Son of God himfelf that is the Author of 
it. But admitting we fhould not meet with the 
formal and pofitive Eftablifhment of it by him, as 
having not ordain'd it there with his own Mouth : 
If the Apoftles have fet it forth, as Men Divinely 
Inf pired, it muft be confeffed, that it is of Divine 
Inftitution ^ fince they have not done it of their 
own Heads, but at the Command of their Matter 5 
who doubtlefs delivered feveral things to them, as 
Si.LuAe takes particular notice, Ath i. 3. pertain- 
ing to the Kingdom of God, in the Converfations 
he had with them from the time of his Refur- 
reclion to that of his Afcenfion into Heaven-, and 
by the Inlpiration of the Holy Ghoft. And laftiy, 
If the Apoftles, by virtue of their Commiflion from 
Jefus Chrift, have founded fuch a Form of Govern- 
ment in the Chrifttan Church-, it muft be likewife, 
if not immediately,' yet at leaft mediately, by the 
fame Right, as being grounded- upon a Divine Au- 
thority : In which lowed Senfe, Epifcopacy may 
be faid to be of Apoftolical Inftitution. 

The fecond Obfervation I am to 
-.ohfervatkn. make, relating to the State of the 

™mt7Ex- ^ ueftion > and which wil1 be of § reat 
tent andDomi- u & towards the Underftanding and 
nionofEpifupa- Explaining of it-, and the removing 
jEf« of feyeral ObjeQioris, which do not 


Episcopacy Afferted. 13 

concern the matter in DXpute, is, that the Poinc 
is not, whether in the very time of the Apoftles, 
/'. e. in its Origine, Epifcopacy was as extended, 
and had as much outward Grandeur, as at this Day > 
This is infinuated into the Minds of the People, to 
poffefs them with an Opinion of the Tyranny of 
the Hierarchical Government. I fhould be in the 
wrong to make a Controverhe of this. It muft be 
confeffed, that in the following Ages it has obtained 
by degrees a greater Extent, by the Converfion of 
Nations, and particular Places j and that it has ar- 
rived to a larger Dominion, by the Circumftances 
of the Church requiring it fo. A thoufand Dif- 
ferences, which have fallen, out within its Pre- 
cin£fs, have given occafion to feveral Regulations , 
and the Bifhops have been obliged, in the Coun- 
cils which have been held by them, to make fe- 
veral Conltitutions, Laws, and Canons, to keep up 
a good Order in the Church. In proportion as 
the Body of the myfticaf Kingdom of Ifrael has 
increafed in Strength, it has been neceflary to in- 
creafe the Power of its Spiritual Judges, to re- 
ftrain it within its Bounds. The Government of 
Colonies, which from time to time are planted 
here and there, does not at firft come nigh to 
that of thofe populous and ancient States, which 
fend them. And it would be ridiculous to ima- 
gine, that when St. Paul founded a Church ac 
Athens , and appointed Dionyjius the Areopaghe 
Bifhop therereof 5 Dionyjius had the fame extent 
of Jurifdi£tion, or iived in the fame State of Gran- 
deur amongft his (lender Clergy, and his incon- 
fiderable Laity, as the Bifhops of London ; Dur- 
ham, or Winchefler, may have, or live in, in their 
large and wealthy Diocefes. Or that when the 
Gofpel was firft predch'd here in England, and Bi- 
fhops fettled in this pair of the Kingdom ; they 
equall'd in Authority and Grandeur thofe who now 


14 The Divine Righto/ 

enjoy their Bifhopricks. It is fufficient, that there 
be an Effential Conformity, and that the Change 
be not in Fundamentals, to affirm, that it is the 
fame Government. The more or the lefs, does not 
vary the Species. The prefent State of the Church 
requires, that Epifcopacy (hould carry fomeLuftre 
with it-, and that there (hould be more Formali- 
ties in the Ecclefiaftical Adminiftration, than were 
at firft, when it began but to take root. And I 
will venture to fay, that if there had been no more 
Regulations made about Difcipline, than thofe 
which were ufed in the time of the Apoftles, it 
would have been impolTibie to prevent a Confufion 
in the Church ^ fince within that very Period, there 
happen'd DhTentions concerning the Government, 
which with much difficulty were allayed : And the 
Adverfaries of Epifcopacy themfdves would have 
it, that the Church being no longer able to fubfift by 
the Apoftolical Difciplin^, it made that Innovation, 
as they pretended, in the fecond Century. Ut in- 
ter Cbrifti fervos or do aliquis ejjet^&x. fays an * Au- 
thor of Reputation amongft them. But what 
would not have fallen out in procefs of Time, 
if when the Church was fpread throughout the 
World, Epifcopacy had not had a larger Extent of 
Jurifdiclion, than it injoyed in the Days of the 
Apoftles ? The Head mull be able to govern the 
Body, in proportion to the ftrength of the Mem- 
bers : For .therein confifts the Juftnefs of the Tem- 
perament, which without it muft be in the utmoit 

But what is the Queftion then? 
But tbeNa- Why, whether in the time of the 
*■». Apoftles, and in the firft Ages of 

Chriftianity, there was in each prin- 
cipal Church an eminent Paftor, who had a De- 

* Cat. Teft. Ver. Lib. 2. de Bed Gub. 


E p is c o p A c Y AJferted. 1 5 

gree above the reft, and was called the Bijhop^ An- 
tiftes^ or n^ss-aJj of it : Whilft the other Clergy- 
men were either Bifhops fimply, or Presbyters, or 
Deacons? And whether thatPaftor was the Bifhop 
of the Church, becaufe to him did of Right be- 
long the Government of it, and the others did but 
afiift him in his Adminiftration -, and becaufe being 
inverted with the Apoftoiical Succeffion, he had 
the Sovereign Right there of ordaining and admit- 
ting Men to the Offices in the holy Miniftry, and 
exercifing Spiritual Jurifdi£tion : Which Right en- 
titled him to the Primacy within his Diftricl, and 
raifed him above the reft of his Clergy, as being 
the Head of them > If this be fo, we may con- 
clude hence, that there has been a Subordination 
in the Miniftry from the very Days of the Apo- 
ftles •, and that it is thence Epifcopacy, which is 
fince become vaftly extended, according to the 
State of the Church, has derived its Origine ^ its 
Adminiftration being conformable to the Nature of 
that, whence it arofe. It is true, fomething of 
Vigour and Luftre has been added to it in its Man- 
hood, which it had not in its Infancy : But ftill 
it refembles it in its Inftitution, Form, and Pre- 
eminency ^ which confifts in an Hierarchical Difci- 

My third Obfervation concerns the 
Epifcopal Primacy, what is to be J;°^Z v f m ] 

j /1 j 1 • tu_ r 1- What Epifcopal 

underitood by it. Thole, who are ,p r j mcy } s * 
not for it, cry out againft it, as down- 
right Tyranny : As if a Man could not be fet in 
an higher, and more eminent Station than another, 
but he muft prefently become a Tyrant. By this 
Primacy then we ought not to underftand fuch a high 
degree of Authority, whereby a Man may prefume 
to have a Right of faying, Sic volo^fic jubeo-, fuch 
is my Pleafure, and fuch is my Command. Such 
i a Defpo- 

1 6 The Divine Right of 

a Defpotical Power Jefus Chrift calls 
Match. xx. 25. a Dominion, in the evil fenfe, and 

condemns ic in thofe, to whom he 
has committed the care of his Churchy as does 

likewife Sr* Peter, ftiling it a Lord- 
1 Pec. v. 3. ing it over God's Heritage. But the 

Nature of the facred Miniftry does 
not hinder, but our Lord may have entrufted cer- 
tain Perfons with the Guidance of his Flock ; and 
they ought to govern it, according to the Poft 
wherein Providence has placed them. I muft own* 
if a Bifhop (hould be fo rafh, under the colour of 
his Primacy, as to go about to do every thing af- 
ter his own Head and Fancy, as if the whole Pru- 
dence of the Ecclefiaftical Adminiftration were 
lodged in himfelf, he would grofly abufe his Au- 
thority. But befides that he has the Scripture, 
and the Canons of the Church, to direft his 
Condu£t, and limit his Power : He is not with- 
out Counfellors. By his Primacy, he is not all, 
and his Clergy nothing. It is not to be doubted^ 
but the Bifhops in the Primitive Times conferred 
with their Clergy, as with their Brethren, upon 
matters of moment ^ and ask'd the Advice of their 
wifeft and learned'ft Presbyters, and even com- 
ply'd with them when there was occafion. And 
it would be an Affront to Proteftant Bifhops, to 
charge them with having no regard for the Coun- 
fel of their Clergy, or with determining of Church* 
Affairs, without imparting them to them. It is 
well known, how Sr. Polycarp, St. \rentus, St. Cy- 
frian^ and other holy Bifhops, behaved themfelves 
herein towards their Clergy ^ thinking it no Dif- 
honour to their C narafter, to take their Confent 
and Names to their Epiftles. And if Men are ig- 
norant, that the modern Bifhops have their Coun- 
fellors, their Chapters, their Chancellors, their Arch- 
deacons, and the like 5 and that, in their Synods 


Episcopacy AJferted. i J 

they enacT: nothing without the Advice of their 
Clergy •, it is becauie they will be ignorant. Their 
Power is fo far from being abfolute, that it is 
reftrained to Bounds •, and thofe fo very ftraight, 
that they have fometimes much to do to reduce 
the Scandalous with the Laws of their Difcipline- 
The Epifcopal Primacy then is fucb a degree of 
Honour and Authority, as fets the Bifhop above 
the Body of his Clergy * and gives him the prin- 
cipal Adminiftration of the Church, with the Right 
of Ordaining to the Miniftry. By which it is evi- 
dent, that this Primacy is neither a Tyranny, not 
an ufurped Dignity*, though it raifes the Bifhop 
above the level of the fimple Presbyters. 

This gives me occafion to enquire 
here into the true Senfe of thai: vut 7 Km the si- 
gn Saying, that the Prafes of the ^ s £™* 
Primitive Times, whom we call the 
Bifhop, was Primus ints^Pares $ .which our Ad- 
verfaries apply to their presiding Paftor, or Mode- 
rator, in their Ecclefiafticai Affemblies, to exprefs 
after their way the Equality of the whole Clergy, 
Now it may be very fafely affirmed, that a Bifhop 
has a Primacy above his Clergy $ and. yet that they 
are his Equals : But not according to the Meaning 
of the Enemies of the Hierarchy, who, with a 
manifeft Contradiction, would prove^ by the Pri- 
macy amongft Equals, an Equality amongft ail Mi- 
ntftersi fo that one fhould not be Superior to 
the other. But does not Equality deftroy Priority,' 
and vice verfd ? And has not he that is firfl: fome- 
thing as fuch, which fets him above the others, 
whom they , would have to ce his Equals > The 
Bifhop then^ as fuch 3 is Primus-, becaufe in that 
refpecl he is above the fecond, and third Order of 
Minifters : His Primacy fers him in another Sta- 
tion, and gives him another Right, than the others 
have, viz, to govern the Chair in chief, and ad- 

C mit 

1 8 The Divine Right of 

mit into the Miniftry ^ which the Apoftles hate' 
left him by Succeffion. But the Presbyters are 
Pares , as to the Prieithood:, becaufe upon that 
Score he has nothing more than they : They 
fhare equally the Functions of that Office, which 
are to Preach the Word, and Adminifter the Sa- 
craments. Which is the true Ground, why the 
Bifhops call the Presbyters Brethren Sympresbyters^ 
and Symmyjins, as poffeffing nothing in that refpeft, 
hut what is common to both. But wb,ioe\er 
fhould conclude from thence, that the BifhoD, as 
invefted with the Epifcopai Dignity, is not above 
the Presbyters, who are not honoured with that 
Office, would certainly Reafon ill. It would be 
the fame thing, as if he fhould infer, thar a Gentle- 
man is not above a Plebeian, .or the Magiitrare 
above the People j becaufe, as Men, they are ail 
Equal. The Bifhop by his Primacy has a Degree, 
which raifes him above thofe, whom the Prieft- 
hood makes Equal to him : And the Apoftolical 
Chair, which he acquires by SucceiTion, gives him 
a new Title, and a new Dignity, which the others 
have not. Theie are the Principles upon which 
I will build what 1 have to fay in behalf of Epif- 
copacy, and for promoting its Iiatereft t Confider- 
ing it, as I have defcribed it in thefe three Ob- 
fervations, viz. As being of Divine Inftitution, Con- 
formable in its Efienrials to that which was efta- 
blifhU by the Apoftles, And as a fuperior Degree 
to the Presbyterar. Which I (ball endeavour to 
prove, by (hewing that it has been believed, and 
exercifed as iuch during the three firft Centuries 5 
and that the bxleOafticai State, from the time of 
the Apoftles, has been compofed of Bifhops, Pref- 
byters, and Deacons, -as of three diftinft Orders for 
the Work of the Miniftry 5 whereof the twa la-ft 
were-always fubordinate to the firft. 


Episcopacy Ajferted. i p 

C H A P. HI. 

A General Proof, that the Hierarchy is cf 
Divine and Apojiolical Injiitution. 

HAving thus ftated the Queftion, and particu- 
larly explained the Senfe and Meaning of 
Divine and Apoftolical Institution, as it may be 
ufed in this Controverfie: I come now to apply it, 
and to prove here in general, that 
the Hierarchv, or the Ep^fcopal Go- ; Epfccpacy of 
vernment, is" of Divine and Apofto- %wine mtn- 
Ileal Inttkution, in.tbe Senies I have 
delivered, and^ explained. 

As to the .firlt Senfe then, of Di= j n t > }e &$ 
vine Inftitution ^ the Point hqing now Senfe. 
to prove, that Jefus Chrift has ap- 
pointed an Hierarchical Order in the Chriitian 
Church, two things are ohferyablc. t. That Jefus 
Chrift having not fpoken in his Gofpel againif that 
Form of Government, which then obtained in the 
true Church, u/>. the Jewifih, nor any way difcounre- 
nanced it •, but only reproved the faife Gioffes, and 
Traditions of the Doflors cf the Law ; he h?s 
thereby tacitly approved ir, and judged it proper 
to be perpetuated in the Chriftian : According to 
that known Maxim, £*ui facet, confentlre videtar, 
Now it is certain, that the Discipline of the Mo- 
faical Religion, in the time of our Saviour, was' 
Hierarchical y there being a Subordination in the 
Degrees of the Miniftry. Our Lord then having 
not defttoy'd it in his new CEconomy, ,he has ra- 
tify'd ir. Arid moreover, he has framed upon that 
Model the Difcinline, and Subordination of the 
Evangelical Miniftry ; Excepting however what 

C 2 was 5 

so , The D I V 1 ~ N 1 K I G H T of 

was Ceremonial, and Typical in the firft^ in which 
refpeft he fulfilled in his own Perfoo the Form 
of that ancient Miniftry, which confided chiefly 
in Sacrificing. 2. The fecond thing to be obferved 
is, that Jefus Chrift has declared himfelf exprefiy 
upon the eftablifhing of the Hierarchy in the Qui- 
ftian Church. It cannot be deny'd, but there was 
a Subordination of Degrees between the twelve 
Apoftles, the Prophets of the New Teftament, and 
the EvangeliRs^ as it will appear there was be- 
tween the (landing Paftors, and thofe who lerved the 
Church in their time. To affirm, that they fhared 
equally the Minifterial Function, and that the 
Apoftles were not above the reft ^ is to let forth 
a Propofition, which is purely falfe : Each one ob- 
ferved his Station, and the Inferiors obey'd their 
Superiors. Now it was Jefus Chrift, who ap- 
pointed thofe different Orders amongft them. For 
St. Pax/ y fpeaking of the Inftitution of the Gofpel- 
Miniftry, tells us, EpheJ. iv. 11, 12. That he that 
ajcended up on high^ viz. the Son of God, being 
wiUing to provide for the Building up of his 
Church, He gave fome^ Apoftles ^ and f owe, Pro- 
phets •, ' and fome, Evangelijis ^ and fome^ Paftors 
and Teachers *, for the perfecting of the Saints^ for 
the work of the Aliniftry, for the edifying of the 
Body of Chrift. If it was he himfelf gave thefe 
divers forts of Offices, Miniftries, or Gifts ^ if it 
was he himfelf made this Subordination^ he has 
not only expreffed himfelf plainly upon the Form 
of the Ecclefiaftical Government, hut he has like- 
wife fettled himfelf fuch a Difcipline : And con- 
fequemly it is of Divine Inftitution, in the firft 
Senfe. And it cannot be pretended, with any co- 
lour. $>f Reafon, that the Church -Government, 
which'was in ufe in the Days of the Apoftles, was 
sot Hierarchical 

j- Againft 

£ rj s c o ;P a c Y Afferted. 2 1 

Agalftft this is to no purpofe the Diftin&ions 
which is commonly brought in, of Minifters Or- 
dinary, and Extraordinary ^ of Minifters for a Time, 
and fuch as were to be Perpetual by Succeflion 
in the Church. For fince Jefus Chrift had ap- 
pointed both the one, and the other, in the time 
of the Apoftles ^ For the perfecting of the Saints^ 
for the work of the Minifiry^ and for the edifying 
of his Body: It is plain, there was a Subordination 
between them, by his own Inftitution. And it 
fignifies as little to alledge, that that Subordination 
was to be but for a Seafon : It was then for that 
Seafon. Bur it has -ialted beyond the Time, 
wherein our Adverfaries pretend, that the Hierr.r- 
chy. of the Ordinary, and Permanent Minifters re- 
gan.-^Since in the*fecood Century t, at leaft in the 
middle of it, there' were Prophets, and Evangelifts. 
So that by the very Cohceffion of thole who op- 
pofe the.Hierarchv., there was then, viz in 
Age of the Apoftles (as it will appear there "is 
been all along) a Subordination amongft the Mini- 
fters in the Chriftian Church. 

What is farther alkdged againft this plain Paf- 
fage, that there is no mention made in ir of Bi 
Jhops\ and consequently, that their Superiority a- 
bove tfoe Presbyters, and the Divine Inftitution of 
Epifcopacy, cannot be fairly deduced from it, Is 
to as little purpofe : If we impartially confider 
the Terms of Paftors, and Teachers^ or Vodors^ m 
the Text- which are equivalent to that o&Bijfhops 
m other places. But before I (hew that it Is ma- 
terial to obferve, that though th words 
put here, Paftors, and Teacher- which may feem 
to 'denote two diftincl: fores ok Officers in the 
Church-, yet they fignifie bu v)ne, and the fame. 
For the Apoftle, diftinguifh y the others by, firft, 

f Eufcb. Hift Ecclcf, lib, $. c.^5. Ib.d. lib. 3. c. 37- 

C - ApoJi/es- % 

$2 The Divine Right of 

Apoflles-, kcondly, Prophets-, thirdly, Evangelifis^ 
but joining Paflors and Teachers together, by a 
Conjunction copulative, as the Grammarians fpeak, 
Ucipfyis k, AicWxaXci -is a clear Intimation, that 
he meant them fo -, if the Senfe of them did not 
require it, as we are going to (hew. 

Tloipfyzs then, or Pajlors, is a Word borrow'd 
from Husbandry , and Pafiurage-, and transferred 
from a Natural and Proper life, to an Inftituted 
and Figurative, both Civil, and Ecclefiaftical. And 
therefore in homer, when it is put with People, it 
Signifies a King, TloijJfi Acts. And it is faid, Matth, 
ii. 6. out of Mic. 5. 2. That out of Bethlehem fhall 
cornea Govemour, 0V1 r woii^ei f Aaov /as t Ic-^riX, 
zfort }fo// /*»/? or feed my People If rati In feveral 
places of the New Teftamenr, it is apply'd to Je- 
lus Chrift ^ and joined with that of Bifivop, as im- 
porting the fame thing, 1 Pet. ii. 25. Ton are now 
returned unto the Shepherd, or Pa ft or, and Bifhop 
cf your Souls. As likewife in effe£t to the fame 
St. Peter 9 by Jefus Chrift himfelf three feveral 
times, JohnxyC\. 1%, 16, 17. where he commands 
him to feed his Lambs, and Sheep. And to the 
Elders of £pfo/W by Sc.P<m*/> who calls them ift 
the fame manner Bifbops, A&sxx. 23. Take heed, 
fays he, unto your J elves , and to all the Flock, 
over the which the Holy Ghoft hath made ydu Over- 
feers, or Bilhops, s E7ricrHC7:y<r, to feed the Church of 
God,which he has pur chafed with his own Blood. As 
does alfo St. Peter thofe of thi 1 Strangers fcatter'd 
throughout Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Afia, and 
Bhhyma, 1 Pet. v. 1,2. The Elders which are among 
you, tells he them, I exhort; Feed the Flock of God 
which is among you, taking the Overfght thereof, 
'E'jttfi&Trfhilit. But if we will take the Comment of 
Sr Cbryjefiow,and the Scholiaits upon the places, it 
putr> tSls matter out of Controverfie, that by Paffprs 
here we ought to ftnderftand Bijbm: * The Apo- 

Episcopacy Ajferted 23 

tc (He fpeaks of thofe, to whom Churches were 
" comrrrtted, namely, of Bifhops ^ fuch as were 
" Timothy, Titus, and the like. 

As to the Teachers , Dotfors, or &icd<r/.a.\ci ^ 
which are here joined together by an Exegetical, 
or Explanatory Particle : When that Term is ufed, 
as the former of Paftors, to denote a peculiar Fun- 
ction in the Church, they can be no others, than 
Bifhops. So even amongft our own Writers, where 
* Bede fays, that Auftin fummon'd a Council of 
Bifhops and Doftors | we can hardly underftand by 
that double Appellation, any others, than the for- 
mer : The Words fignifying the two parts of the 
fame Office, 01 the fame Officers in two different 
refpe&s. And as the Teachers are diftinguifh'd 
from the Prcphety and Apofiles, 1 Cor. xti. 28. by 
fir ft , Apofiles ; fecondarily, Prophets -, thirdly, Teach- 
ers ^ after that, Miracles -, then Gifts of Healing, 
Help-, Governments, diver fities of Tongues : Much 
after the fame manner, as the Paftors and Teachers 
are here from the others : So is there a Diftin&ion 
to be made, if we will fpeak ftriQly, between 
Prophet and Evangelifi, and Eva nge lift and Teacher, 
This Function of 'a Go) pel-Prophet was properly to 
declare more at large the Doftrineof Faith, to thofe 
who had already receiv'd it from the Apofttes., or 
Evangelifts} and to confirm it outof3%L, ana 
the ancient Prophets. OF an Evangelifi .< fteaetjl 
the Word to fuch as had not yet heird it. And 
of a Teacher, as to that par-r, much the fsme with 
a Prophet's 5 but fo, according to the Greek Fa- 
thers, that this fpoke all from the but the 
other, as they exprefs it, from him ft If too. 

I muft add a Word or two here cpocerftieg the 
'Yky&ljfpoK, which we tranfhte in or.r New Teltat- 
merit, thofe that have the Rule, the Governors ; 

I Bed. Hift. Eccief. lib. j 1. cap, 2. 

C 4 Becaufe 

94 The Divine Right of 

Becaufe they are fometimes mentioned there, par- 
ticularly, Heb. xiii. 7. Remember them which have 
the Rule over you, who have ffokcn unto you the 
Word of God. whofe Faith follow., confidering the 
end of their Conversation. And Verf. 17. Obey them 
that have the Rule over you , and fubmit your 
/elves : And in the Wruings of the Primitive Fa- 
thers, which I (hall have occafion to quote. That 
they were Biftiops, befides other Arguments that 
might be produced, we have the Judgment of 
St.Chryfoftom, and others : he fpea <fof Bijbops, fays 
the Father upon the place, /ind who were thofe that 
had the Rule over them, i. e. the Hebrews, the Greek 
Commentators upon that Epiftle tell us , They 
were the fingular Pr<efetfs of Jerufalem, and of all 
the Cities in Paleftina. So that Lprefume, no 
more need be faid here concerning this Point. 

As to the fecond Senfe of Divine 
in the fecond Inftitution j it is evident, that Epi£ 
?*$' copacy is of Divine, and alfo of Apo- 

ftoiical Right, in the Senfe I have 
explained: Since the Apoftles have fet it forth, 
and convey'd it to the Church by the Direction of 
Jefus Chrift, and the Jnfpiration of the Holy Spi- 
rit. Sc. Paul, in his firft Epiftle to Timothy^ 
Chap. iii. and in that to Titus ^ Chap, i. fup- 
pofing the Office of a Bifhop to be a Handing 
one in the Church, and calling it a good Work •, 
defcribes his Character in full. And not only fo, 
but he gives thofe two Biftiops, throughout thofe 
Epiftles, feyeral important Inftru£t ions, how they 
ought to behave themfelves in the Houfe of God, 
ss Biftiops. Moreover, in his Epiftle to the He- 
hyws, Chap. xiii. Ver. 17. he charges them, To 
Obey them that have the Rule over them, and to 
fubmit vx. And in his firft to the Thejfa- 

hniaqS) 'Chap. v. Ver. 12, 15. he exhorts them, Te 
know them woich labour among them y and are over 


Episcopacy Afferted. 2 5 

them in the Lord, and admonifb them • ani to ejieem 
them highly in Love for their Works fake. But 
when he was at Miletus, in his way to Jerufalem^ 
he not only fent for the Elders of the Church to 
come to him at Ephefus, and reflgned up to them 
his Care of the Flock 5 but he aifo put them in 
mind, That the holy Ghoft had made them Over- 
feers, or Bifhops over it, to feed the Church of 
God, (the word in the Original implies, to inftrutf, 
and govern) which he hath pur chafed with his own 
Blood, Afts xx. 28. So that I am bold ro fay, none 
can deny Epi r ™pacy to be o r Divine and Apoftolical 
Inftitution, in this Se ife, but fuch as reject the Au- 
thority of riie -Scripture^. ■ For fuppofing thefe 
things to ha' r e been done, and did by the Apo- 
ftle. It muft have he< in Obedience to the Com- 
mands Jefus Ghf ! :oncerning the Govern- 
ment of thfe Churcfi, in the fpace between our 
Lord's Refu'rreQioh and. Afcenfion, which they 
might impart to him after his calling to the Apo- 
ftleftiip : And in compliance with the Inspirations 
of the Holy Ghoft, who acted immediately in him, 
zvA by him. And therefore thefe things are it 
tributed to the Spirit, iGr.xii. 28. and he is fa id 
there to have fet the feveral Minilteries in the 
Church. It was He that directed the Lot for Mat- 
thias, Aftsi.26. And that faid, Chap, xi it. 2. Se- 
parate now unto me Barnabas and Saul, for the 
Work where unto 1 have called them : And that in 
the beginning pointed out the very Perform for 
the Miniftry, either by Infpiration, or form re 
markable Gifts'. The A pottles then did bur de- 
clare, and execute the Orders of Jefus Chrift, and 
his Spirit 9 who were the Principles of their 
Words, and Actions: They were but the InftrU.' 
ments thofe Divine Perfons made life of, to fet 
forth their Intentions, and the Plan they had made 
of the Government cftlje Church, But' the ErTe£i 
*. ought 

%6 The Divine Right of 

ought to be attributed to the principal Caufe, 
And therefore if Jefus Chrift, and the Holy Ghoft, 
have given fuch Dire&ions to the Apoftles, and 
injoyned them to publifh them to the World * 
they ought to be look'd upon as Divine : And 
what is fo deliver'd, is of Divine, and Apoftolical 
Inftitution. Which will farther appear in the courfe 
of this Treatife. 

As to the third Senfe of Divine 
in the third Inftitution \ it is pretty plain, that 
Stnfc. Epifcopacy is of Divine, and Apo- 

ftolical Right, in that loweft Senfe t 
Since if the Apoftles themfelves have exerciied 
fuch a kind of Government in the Church, and 
tranfmitted the fame to others, as I doubt not 
to make it appear in the Series of this Tra£t - y 
they have done it purfuant to the CommilTion they 
had received from Jefus Chrift, and according to 
the Pattern he had fet them. Befides the fecret 
Conferences he had with them after his Refur- 
jeftion ^ before he left the World, and them, he 
gave them a formal CommilTion, Mattb. xxviii. i?, 
20. To go, and teach all Nations, Baptizing them 
in the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of 
the Holy Ghoft : Teaching them to ohferve all things 
which he had commanded them : And lo, he would be 
with them to the end of the World : That is, to ga- 
ther and conftitute the Chriltian Church. This he 
had promtfed them before, in fome meafure, in the 
Power of rhe Keys, when he told Sr. Peter, Match, 
xvi. 1 8, 19. Thou art Peter, and upon this Rock I 
-mil build my Church, and the Gates of hell fhall 
not prevail againji it. And I will give unto thee 
the Keyi of the Kingdom of Heaven : and what fa- 
svcr thou fhah bind on Earth, foal I be bound in 
Heaven , and whatsoever thou fh alt loofe on Earth, 
fhall be tooted in Heaven. But that none may pre- 
tend, this Piomife was only made to Sr Peter, it rs 


E p Lsc.OPAc y Averted. ij 

exprefly repeated to all the Apoftles, after our 
Lord's Refurrection, and in part made good to 
them, till the Completion of it upon the Defcenc 
of the Holy Ghoft, John xx. 22, 23. when He 
breathed on them, and /aid unto them, Receive ye 
the Holy Ghojf. Whofe foever Sins ye remit, they 
are remitted unto them ^ and whofe foever Sins ye 
retain, they are retained. And ac the fame time, 
(all Pozcer being given unto him in Heaven, and 
in Earth, as he declares in Sr, Matthew xxvnl 18.) 
he Commiifions them to their. Office, in thefe 
words, At the father hath (t$t me, even fo J end. 
lyou, John xx. 21, Now t he Father fent his Son 
Jefus-QrHi into the World,, by his Effential Sove- 
reign Power, to form a new Church, the Qhrijdian 
in the room of the Jewijh. And He, by Virtue of 
that Authority, vtfbilft he continued here on Earth, 
preaclvd the Gftfpel •, inftuuted fome Hires to be 
perpetually ufed amonglt the Faithful, viz. ths 
two Sacraments-, called certain Difciples, whom 
he governed according to his good Pieafure-, to 
whom he gave Commandments, and whom he im* 
ploy'd in ieveral Tranfaclions : And in a word. hi& 
rhfe Foundations of his Spiritual State. And ha- 
ving finifh'd the Work he came about, as far a: it 
was neceffary for him $ and being to renirr 
Heaven, which he had left but for a tinv 
propagate his Kingdom throughout the 
to provide for the Continuation of it to the Qlfr- 
fummation of all things ^ he thought fir, as he had 
been authorised himfelf to begin, fo to if 
fome others "to go on with the Project, which G : 
had refolved upon from all Eternity, of calling %h 
ilniverfal Church, And thereupon he Cormnif- 
fioned his chief Followers, thofe wife had been the 
conftant Obfervers of his Doftrine, ?ma ?>tfcip 1: ne_ 
and whom he judged fitted for fhii Iffipoyrttent," 
to go and make all the.Nr. r :~" Difcbles^ inith 


$8 The Divine Right of 

ting them into the Church by Baptifm : And he 
promifed them, that in fo doing, he would be 
with them by his Spiritual Pretence, even to the 
Conclufion of the World. If then they went there- 
upon, and did fo h was it not by Virtue of that 
Divine Authority, and in Conformity with his In- 
ftru&ions , and the Model he had fet them , that 
they fettled the Hierarchical Government in the 
Church > And if this does not make Epifcopacy 
in its full Courfe throughout th^ feverai Ages of 
Chriftianity, to \>t of Divine Inftitution imme- 
diately : does it not mediately, and originally? 
But what likelihood is there, that the Apoftles, 
of their own Heads,, and depending upon their 
own Prudence, fhould undertake to eltablifh a 
Form of Eccleliaftical Government, without Corn- 
million, Inftructions, or Example ? '"Would they 
tsot have been afraid to lay in the very bottom, 
upon which the Church Hands, a Foundation fub- 
ject to Ruin, and of dangerous Confequence > 
What ! was not the Church liable to be cor- 
rupted in its Government, as" well as in its Do- 
ctrine > And in this refpeft, would they order any 
thing, that was to be perpetual, whereof they 
might not fay, We have thus received it of the 
Lord i and we deliver unto you, what we have 
received of him ? And if God was not fatisfied 
with giving Mofes on Mount Sinai all the Laws, 
which the Ifraclites were to obferve, to keep in 
his Covenant, until the time cf the King, who 
was to reftore ail things, and fettle a better (Eco- 
nomy $ but was pleafed farther to chalk out, to 
the leaft Cord of the Pattern of the Tabernacle, 
Without which Mofes would not have dared to go 
abo'it it . could Jefus Chrift be contented with 
delivering t-o his Apoftles on Mount Sion the Do- 
ctrines of his Law, without the Plan of the Ta- 
bernacle of his Church, according to which they 


Episcopacy Averted. 29 

fhould build, and maintain it > Or of themfelves, 
without his Commiflion, Inftructions, or Example 5 
would they have ventured upon fo great a Work, 
wherein all things were to be done according to 
the Weight and Meafure of the Sanctuary > This 
can no way be imagined, unlefs Men will fay, 
that the Government of che Church is a matter 
of no moment, and which does not deferve, that 
God (hould take any courfe in ir. But can that 
be thought a thing of no moment, or unworthy 
the Care of Jefus Chrift, which is to eftablifh the 
Order, Union, arid* Subfiftence of his Church, to 
the end of the World? And after all, St Paul 
tells us expreily, Heb.v. 4, hat no \ .. \e 1 
this Honour unto himfelf but he that is sailed of 
God, as was Aaron i I e. can come into the Pxiefl- 
hood, but by' a Drvine Authority.' And nor only 
fo, but that Jefus Chrift himfelf, as Man, glori- 
fied not himfelf \Jo be made an High Prieji : But he 
that /aid unto him^ Thou art my Son^ to day have I 
begotten thee^ \>r. j, 

Something muft be fatd here for the Explication 
of that Expreffion in the Text, Even unto the end. 
of the World, so)* *? Qwrikdas tS cucwv©>, E 
unto the Consummation or Conclufion of tfc 
Becaufe it has been lately mifapply'd, to reftrain 
out Saviour's Promife to a very fhort fpace of 
Time, the End of the Jewifh State, which hap- 
pened foon after. And againft the Perpetuity Of his 
Commiflion to his Apoitles, and their Succeflbis. 
And the Government of the Chriltian Church . 
- grounded upon it. The Word 'AioJv then, as it is 
tranflated by JEvum, Age , which are a}l the fame, 
with the Terminations in their relpe&ive Lan- 
guages, fignifies properly a Duration of an hun- 
dred Years. But the del:,-.., whole* Stile the 
holy Penmen of the New I , : nmonly 

follow, ufe it in general i%r<a,- linger fpace, tJ 

■ 3 Ma 

30 The Divihe Righto/ 

a Man's Life* or at leaft, that which is unknown 
to them. And therefore, in a Figurative Senfe, 
they imploy it to denote the World, whole Dura- 
tion is meafured by Time, but fuch as is hidden 
from us. For which Reafon our Tranflators ufual- 
ly render it, both in the Singular, and Plural 
Number, by the World, or the Worlds. So thar, 
by the End of the Wvrld here, we may under- 
ftand the End of the Age, or of the World ; 
Which comes to the fame thing in this place, 
tot it is obiervable, that our Lord does not ex-. 
prefs himfelf of the End of this Age, or this 
World-, as it he had meant it of the then prefent 
Time, in the Jews Senfe : But of his own, the 
Period of the Mellias^ which began upon his Re- 
furrection, and was to be the laft, according to 
them, and to continue to the end of this vifibie 
World. But if we confider what he joins with 
it there, as an Explication of his Meaning, I am 
with you alway, all the Days, -ardvar rds r'/as^r- 
after he had commanded them to Go and Teach 
all Nations ; that PaiTage is capable of no other 
Interpretation, without the greateft Abiurdities. 

C H A £ 

Episcopacy Afferted. 31 


General Proofs of the Hierarchy 3 and of 
the Dijlin&ion of the Degrees in the 
Mini fry ^ in the ¥ erf on of thejpojlles. 

WHat I have now faid concerning the Divine, 
and Apoftolical Inftiturion of Epifcopacy, 
brings me orderly into the other Article of the 
Controverfie, and a main Point in this Debate, 
viz. Whether Epifcopacy has been in ufe in the 
Church from the very Time of the Apoftles, as & 
diftinft Government from Presbytery 5 and that: 
from that Period, viz. from the firft Age of Chrl- 
ftianity, there has been a Subordination in rhe M*- 
niftry > Now to begin with the Apoftles themfelves ; 
We meet in them with a pregnant Inftance of the 
Epifcopat's being diftinguifh'd from the Presby- 
terat. For though in the Qualiry of Presbyters, 
they were not above the Minifters of the fame 
Order, who as fuch are all Equal ^ the Priefthood 
admitting of no Degrees, and being all in all, up- 
on this account, that every one of them has a 
Right of Preaching the Word, and Adminiftring 
the Sacraments, in which confifts the very EiTence 
of the Office : Yet it cannot be deny'd, that they 
had fome Authority above the others, in refpe£t 
of the Government of the Church , which was 
committed to them. It is uncontrovertec , that 
feefides the Power of the Priefthood, they had. a 
general Infpe£tion over the Flock : And that the 
Clergy of each Church, which they had founded, 
held of them ^ and coniidered them as thole who 
bad the Condu£l of the Sheepfold of our Lord, 
*- and 

%2 The Divine Right of 

and to whofe Di regions they were to conform, as 
being under their Jurifdiftion. And they cannot 
be charged with having abufed that Right of In- 
fpe&ion, and Superintendency ^ or to have changed 
it into that Dominion, which is condemned in the 
Gofpel. For to exercife a Degree of Superiority, 
does not imply a Tyrannical Dominion : Other- 
wife all that are railed in Authority above others 
in this World, whole Beauty confifts in that very 
Diveriity of Degrees, and Offices, would be Ty- 
rants } which I fuppofe none wilL affirm. 

I expect, that it will be objected, That that 
Privilege of Governing the Churches, which I pre- 
tend the Apoftles had above other Paftors, was 
an Appendix of their Apoftlefhip, grounded upon 
their having gathered them. But if there be not, 
by a Divine Inftitution, divers Degrees of Dignity, 
and Authority in the Church-, why will Men afcribe 
one to the Apoftles, upon any account 1 whatsoever > 
Our Adverfaries muft declare, according to their 
Principles, that all Minifters being Equal, the 
Apoftles themfelves had no more Right to govern 
the Churches in chief, than any Presbyters ^ and 
that what would be finful in others, could not be 
innocent in them. Perhaps they will repeat again, 
That their Apoftlefhip gave them that Authority. 
But that is what I contend for. viz. That they 
were thereby made Bifhops ^ and confequently that 
Epifcopacy had its Source in the Apoftlefhip $ 
fince the Apoftles, as fuch, had a Right of In- 
fpefting, and Governing the Churches, above all 
other Paftors, in their feveral Diftri&s. More- 
over, call this diftinguifh'd Dignity, Apoftlefhip^ 
or. Epifcopacy ^ as you pleafe h it will be but a 
change of the Name : The Thing in the bottonn 
will be ftill the fame, viz. That the Apoftles in- 
joyed a Pre-eminency, and had a Superiority above 
the other Minifters, whom they had fettled in 


Episcopacy Afferted. 3 3 

their refpe&ive Churches ♦, wherein confifts pro- 
perly the Office of a Bifhop. Now that they had 
fuch a Power in the Church, fuperior to that of 
the other Paftors, (whether Bifhops, or Presbyters) 
who were Equal to them in other refpefts^ is, I 
think, very clear: If we will judge of it by their 
Practice, and their own Teftimony. St. Paul tells 
us exprefly, 2 Cor. xi. 28. That be had the Care of 
all the Churches. Ic was his Bufinefs then to build 
them up ^ and to caufe the Order, which he had 
eftablifh'd in them, to be well obferved. And 
hereof he gives us a particular Inftance, as 10 the 
Church of Epbefus* AGs xx. which I have before 
mentioned to another purpofe. Going bound in 
the Spirit unto Jerufilem, and being ap ; henfive 
they fhould fee his Face no more -, he lends from 
Miletus to Ephefus, and calls for the Elders of 
the Church 5 who being come to him, as owning 
him for theft general Governor ^ he delivers tcj 
them the Inftru&ions, v which he thought neceffary, 
to keep up the Body in a found State, by a pure 
Doctrine, and a*good'Difcipline* 4#fxx.28. Take 
heed therefore, fays he to them, unto your ft roes, 
and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Gbofi 
hath made you Overfeers, to feed the Church of God, 
which he hath pur chafed with hk own Blood. I mean 
not by all this, that the Apottles had no more 
than the Bifhops, their Succeffors^ for their in- 
fallible Spirit, their extraordinary Gifts, and their 
unlimited Commifiion, muft make a great diffe- 
rence : But that they were, alike in the ftand 
part of their Adminiftration, and the ElfentiaJs of 

. B u ut to fe this Matter in its due ne Lr ,, copal 
Light-, the Epifcopal Dignity oi the vignhy of the 
Apoftles, appears chiefly in Four ApofiUs appear 
things. f» F:Mr 7 

i. In 

54 The Divine Right of 

i. In that they aflumed to them r 
i. in their f e ] ves tne Authority of Writing their 

S3,!*'* D ° arlne > 3nd Discipline to the 
Churches, which they had founded, 
as their Directors in both. Thus St. Paul writ his 
Epiftles to the Rdmans, Corinthians, Galatians, E- 
phefians, Philip pi ans, Coleffians, Thejjalonians, and 
Hebrews: And even to the Bifhops, whom he had 
Ordained, and left to fijpply his abfence «, as Timo- 
thy, and Titus: As iikewtfe to private Perfons j 
as Philemon, Apphia, and to Archippus, of the 
Clerical Order. Thus did St. James write a Ge- 
neral Epiftle to the twelve Tribes , which were 
fcatter'd abroad. Thus did alfo St. Peter two 
General ones, to the Strangers featt'er'd through- 
out Pont us, G a!at in, C/ppadoeia, AJia, and Bithy- 
nia. Thus d'd St. fUit a General one to them 
that were ianSified by God the Father, and pre- 
ferved in Chriit Jefas, and called. And thus did 
St. Jobn*6r\e Getieral, and two Particular ones, to 
the Eiecl Lady, and her Children, (probably the 
Church of ferufalem^) and to Gains, a Layman $ 
befides his Revelation to the feven Churches in 
AJia. Now to what end did they write thefe 
Epiftles., which are found in the very Body of the 
New Teflament^ to thofe Churches which they had 
founded, or which they had referved to themielves 
to govern •, or which, by virtue of their general 
Commillion, as Apoitles, of edifying the Church 
of Chriit, they had a Right to direft above their 
particular Paftors? To what end, I fay, did they 
do this, but to maintain a found Doctrine, and a 
good Order in them > Was it not for thefe two 
Ends, that they took upon them to write-, and 
that both Minifters, and People fhould follow 
their Inftruclions? Certainly they would not have 
pretended to fuch an Authority, if they had not 
believed, that thofe they writ 'to, were bound to 


Episcopacy Afferted. 3 5 

fubmit to their Conftitutions ♦, and ro conform to 
their Diicipline, as well as ro their Doctrine. For 
thofe Writings contain Rules of Difcipline, for 
the well ordering of the Church ^ no lefs than Do- 
ctrines of Faith, to initrucl: its Belief 

2. The Epifcopal Dignity of the j Jn thejr 
Apoltles appears in their Vifiting the v'ifi'thg them. 
Churches, to fee how Matters went 
there ^ and to take a courfe in them for the fu- 
ture, if there was occafion. Thofe holy Men were 
not content with fending them their Instructions 
in their Epiftles, when they were obliged to be 
abfent h that a good Order frright be kepr up in 
them: But they were careful, as their chief Go- 
vernors, to Vifit them in Perfon, to know if they 
continued found «in Doftrine, and Difcipline. For 
in thole Vifitations^ they not only 'Preached the 
Gofpel, but they ordained what both Paftcfs, and 
Flocks were to do : • They corrected what was a- 
mifs, they abrogated what was inconvenient, they 
fupplied what was wanting, and they appointed 
what was neceflary for a good Government-. Here- 
of St. Paul gives us a plain Evidence in himfelf, 
declaring to the Corinthians, 1 Cor. iv. 19, 21. 
That he would come to them fhortly^ to redreis the 
Schifm, which fome falfe Apofties were fomenting 
amonglt them^ and to correct their Conts^ntions 
with the Rod of Difcipline, by Excommunicating 
the Delinquents. And he tells them, 2 Cor. xiii. 2. 
That if he came again, he mould not fpare, viz, 
thofe who diiturbed the Church by their Divifions, 
and other Diforders. If he had not had fome 
Authority in the Government of the Flock, and a 
fuperior Degree to the other Paftors ^ would he 
have threamed them with fuch a Viilracion ? Would 
nor thofe, who troubled the Churcn, have anfwer- 
ed him. We have no occafion for your Coming 5 
we are all Equal 5 we will Govern our felves, as 

D 2 we 

%6 The DlVlNERlGHTtff 

we underftand it : And as for the Flock, we can 
take care of it without you ^ we dread not the 
Thunderbolts ^ you would frighten us, by bringing 
your Rod with you > Thofe who had a mind to 
deftroy the Reputation of the Apoftie at Corinth, 
would not have loft this opportunity % nor failed 
to cenfure, and exaggerate this fuperior Autho- 
rity, which he affumed to himfeif over the Cler- 
gy •, and likewife over the Laity, which was com- 
mitted to them, as well as to him. The Apoftles 
undertook thofe Vifitations, in the Churches they 
had founded, not only to maintain there a good 
Difcipline^ but alfo to ordain the Paltors, (if there 
was notfufficient Provifion made) who were necefla- 
ry for their Edification. For without fuch an Or- 
dination, they could neither Preach the Word, nor 
Adminifter the Sacraments, nor perform the Fun- 
ctions of Minifters in any refpeft. This Faft is 
proved by their Prafltice at their Vifitations. And 
when they could not attend it themfelves, (as in- 
deed they could not often) by reafon of the di- 
ftance of the Places they were at, or their being 
taken up with more prefling Affairs of the Church -, 
they deputed in their room fome of the moil ex- 
cellent Paftors about them, whom they invefted 
with their Authority, by ordaining them Bifhops \ 
and giving them a Commiffion to regulate the Con- 
cerns of thofe Churches, and confer Orders there, 
by the Impofition of their Hands on fuch as they 
fhould judge worthy to be admitted into them. 
Thus were Ordained, and Deputed Apollos, Timo- 
thy, Titus, Mark, &c. And fay not, that it was fo 
done through Neceflny, becaufe there were no Pa- 
ftors whither they went to perform that Office. 
For thofe Churches were already planted : And it 
is rrioft certain, they had in them a Clergy, which 
confifted of feveral Minifters $ as is evident in thofe 
of Corinth, Ephefus, Philippe Thejfalonica, &c. And 


Episcopacy Afferted. 37 

confequently if all the Minifters were Equal, and 
had a Right of Ordaining, they might have done 
it themfelves, without putting the Apoftles to the 
trouble, and hazard of long Journeys, and danger- 
ous Voyages j or for that purpofe, obliging them 
to depute Bifhops. Notwithftanding, we do not 
find, that in the time of the Apoftles, any one was 
admitted into the Miniftry, but by them, or by 
thofe to whom they had given fuch a CommifTion. 
The Power of Ordaining was in the Hands of thofe 
who poiTeffed a diftinguifh'd Authority : Other- 
wife there would have been no need, that the 
Apoftles, or their Commiflioners , ihould crofs 
Countries, and Seas, to inftitute Minifters into 
Churches, which had a numerous Ci ,r;:,y, if thefe 
might have done it without them. It was for 
thefe Reafons, that St. John, who was Bifhop of 
Epbefus^ returned to that Church, as ibon as he 
was difcharged from his Banifhment into the Hie 
otFathmos. For, according to the Teft I monies of 
Irenaus, and Clemens Alexandrinus^ which * Eu- 
Jebius reports : Domttian being dead, St. John the 
Apoftle and Evangelift, came and dwelt in Afia 9 
where he refumed the Government of all the 
Churches, which belonged to the Province of £- 
pbefuS) as their common Bifhop, and Inlpectorj 
appointing Bifhops where there ^(hould be any, 
Admitting the Clergy, and providing tot the 
good Order of thofe Churches. " Whereof, fays 
\lren&us^ " all the Presbyters are WitneflTes, who 
cc have feen John, and muft have known, thai he 
* did all thefe things. And again, |l " The Church 
c which is ztEphefus^ was founded by SiPaui, aid 
" governed by St. John \ who dwelt there till the 

* Eufeb. Hift. Ecclef. lib, 3. cap. 23. Clem. Alex, de Di- 
vit. Salv. Num. 42, f If en, adv. Hasr. lib. 2. cap. 3. 

|| Ibid. lib. 3. cap. 3. 

X) 3 " time 

38 The Divine Right of 

" time of Trajan. Who was there but St. John, 
that was Pallor of all the Churches in that Di- 
Rri£t ? In the very Days of Sc. Paul, as appears 
from the Place before cited, A&s xx. they were 
already many : And doubtlefs they were yet more 
numerous in the Reign of Nerva, and Trajan. But 
St. John was the fir ft of them, and the chief Bi- 
fhop of that Province. And therefore, as foon as 
he obtained his Liberty, he returned to his Flock ^ 
and exerciied the Office of Bifhop amongft them 
unto the Day of his Death. 

3. The Epifcopal Dignity of the 
2. in the Apoftles appears in the Deference 
£*&.& the Churches paid then,, by fubmit- 
VireShns. ting to their Directions. It was the 
conftant Cuftorn of the Chriftians, 
when there was any Queftion about the Govern- 
ment, and the Rule which was to be obferved by 
the Flock of Chrift, to give notice of it imme- 
diately to their refpe&ive Apoftles-, to the end 
they might have their Senfe upon it, and might 
know how to behave themfelves, when a Diforder 
was gotten in among them. This the Church of 
Corinth Religioufly kept towards St. Paul. And 
therefore never failed to acquaint him with the 
Contentions, which from time to time difturbed 
its Body ; with the Inceft of one of its Members * 
with the Law Suits, which ieveral of them brought 
in againft their Brethren, before the Tribunal of 
the Unbeliever^" 5 with divers Cafes concerning 
Marriage-, with the Points concerning Meats of- 
fered unto Idols, and indifferent things 5 with 
Ieveral Diforders in its Religious Affemblies, how 
their Men Prayed, and Prophefied with their Heads 
covered, and the Women uncovered ^ and fome 
ipake in zn unknown Tongue^ and with their 
prophaning the Lord's Supper. And likewife de- 
fired his Counfel concerning the Maintenance of 


E p I s c op a c y Ajferted. 39 

the Miniftry, and the Collections for the Saints. 
And all this, that the old Leaven fhould he purged 
out} and that he might give the Corinthians his 
Directions upon thefe Points, and re$ore the 
Church to a good Order. Which the Apoiue took 
fpecial care of ^ as appears from the feveral An- 
fwers he returned them upon ail thcfe Feints, 
which concern the Government of the Church ^ 
wherein he inftructs them, what they ought to do, 
in his Judgment, upon theie Emergencies, itchefe 
Proceedings, and Tranfa£Hons between the Church 
of Corinth and St. Pa///, and St. Paul and the 
Church of Corinth, do not (hew plainly, that its 
Clergy owned iome Superiority in him, as to its 
Government; fince both Paftors, and Flock defired 
his Inductions, as of one who had trie InfpeQiori 
over them: And if after this, Men will pretend-, 
that all the Minifters of that Cliurch were Equal 
with the Apoftle, and that they, equally fhared 
with him the Authority in ic^ I do not fee, but 
they may wrangle to the World's end about the 
cleared Matters of Fact. The turbulent Pallors, 
who fought, by their Intereft amongft the People, to 
make the Church of Corinth fay, / am of fuch an 
one, and 1 am of juch an one. would undoubtedly 
have bailed at all thofe Regulations of Sc, Paul s 
aud would not have failed to clamour openly, 
What has he to do to meddle with & ^ But 

they were toofenfible, that the Church would own 
his Authority, and fubmit to his Directions. And 
St. Paul knew full-well, that fuch a Deference was 
due to him, as being the Superior, under whom 
the Clergy of G?n#/£ adminiSred the Government. 
For which reafon he performs the Duty of Bilhop 
in it; and they acquiefce in his Authority over 
them. If it comes to this at laft, % that dur Adver- 
faries, being fore'd by the Evidence of Truth, will 
acknowledge upon the whole matter, that the 

D 4 ApoQles 

40 The Divine Right of 

Apoftles were general Superintendents in the 
Church 5 and that they had a fuperior Power in 
their Judgments and Determinations, in refpett of 
Difctpline, as well as Do&rine, from which there 
lay no Appeal^ as indeed it cannot well now be 
denied : I have as much as I defire. For it does 
follow from thence, that they had an Authority, 
which the other Paftors had not. Whether they 
had it as Apoftles, or Bifhops, is not very mate- 
rial : It is enough for me to prove, that from the 
Apoftolical time, inclufioe % there have been Paftors 
in the Churches, who had a fuperior Authority 
above the others $ which is the Foundation of 
the Epifcopal Dignity. Whether it was quaienus 
Apoftoli, or quatenu? Epifcopi h the Name does 
not change the Thing : The Diftin£tion of Degrees 
remains between the Minifters, and their Equa- 
lity is deftroyed, as to the Point in difpute. 

4. The Epifcopal Dignity of the 
■* 4 'n, In n- he - Apoftles appears in their Power of 

ifoZflli cafti °g M ^ n out of the Church - 

church. When the Apoftles had a juft caufe 

to proceed to that Extremity with 
any one, they were ufed to pronounce an Ex- 
communication againft him, and to fignirle it to 
the Faithful •, who approved, and executed it. I 
fhall not inftance here only in the cafe of the In- 
ceftuous Perfon at Corinth, againft whom that 
Church would not pafs to an Anathema, without 
the Advice of St. Paul: He was obliged to deliver 
the Sentence himfelf, and to fend it to the Clergy, 
to be put in Execution. It is remarkable, that he 
writes to Timothy, to the end the Church (hould 
take notice of it; that of his own Authority he 
had delivered unto Satan Hymeneus, and Alexan- 
der ; 1 Tim. i. to. It is probable he did no lefs by 
fhygellus, and Hermogenes, 2 Tim. i. l%. Dema^ 
mi Alexander the Coppeifmith 3 Chap. iv. IP, 14° 

Episcopacy Afferted. 4 1 

For to what purpofe does he Characterize them 
in that manner, but that all the Faithful may 
know, that they were caft out of the Churchy and 
that they were not to Communicate with them ^ 
nor even, as it is exprefs'd, 2 John 10. to bid them^ 
God fpced? And as the Apofties took upon them 
to Excommunicate Men, fo did they likewife to 
Reftore them to the Church. Witnefs the Excom- 
municated Peribn, 2 Cor. ii. whom, upon his Re- 
pentance, Sr. Paul forgave, and of himfelf recon- 
ciled to the Peace of the Church. From which 
feveral Inftances, it. is evident, that the Apofties 
had a Right of themfelves to Excommunicate De- 
linquents, wkh<3ut giving a Reafon to the other 
Paftors of their Proceedings tijejein} or to call the 
Clergy together for that purpofe. As likewife that 
they had a paramount Authority $ and thatjn that, 
no more than in many other things, the other Pa- 
ftors were not Equal with them. 


Divers Proofs, that in the Time of the 
Affiles there were Bijhops, dijlin- 
gnijb'd from the other Minijlers D and 
ejlablijb'd by them. 

WHat I have delivered above, relates particu- 
larly to the Apofties. But in refpeft of 
the Minifters in general, this Queftion may be put 
here, viz. Whether in the time of* the Apofties 
there were Bifhops, i. e. Paftors, who anfwered to 
tbofe that are now at the Head of the Clergy * 


42 The Divine Right of 

and are diftingui'fh'd from the reft by their Power 
of Ordaining, and becaufe the chief Government 
of the Church of their Diftrift belongs to them > 
To which I anfwer : 

i. That admitting, for Argument-fake, that there 
were not 5 that would not abate any thing of the 
Antiquity of Epifcopacy, which I have carry'd up 
to the Apoftoitcal Period : Becaufe the Apoftles 
thernfelves were Bifhops of the Unlveifal Church, 
and diftinguifh'd from the other Paftors-, befides 
that its Government was in their Hands, and they 
difpens'd it as they judged tit. They were general 
Superintendents, upon whom depended the Con- 
duct of all the Faithful* and from whom is de- 
rived the Office of JSifhop, as from its Spring : So 
that they alone might be fufficient, at that time, 
to be the Governors of the Chriftian Church. 

2. That it is certain in Fac\ that the Apoftles 
in their Life-time communicated to fome Perfons 
the Office of Bifhops ; as is evident in St. James, 
and St. Simeon, Bifhops of Jerufalem 5 and parti- 
cularly in St. Timothy, and $x f Titi?s\ the former 
whereof was ordained the firft Bifhop of the Church 
of the Ephefians, and the latter of the Cretans y 
us we have it fpecified in the Subfcriptions of the 
Epiftles to them -, which, though no part of Cano- 
nical Scripture, are yet of good Antiquity. For 
-a farther Proof of which, St. Paul injoins Timo- 
thy, I Tim. iv. 22. To lay Hands fuddenly on no 
Man ; and Chap. Hi. 6. to admit no Novice, i. e. 
one newjy come to the Faith, into the Epifcopal 
Order: And gives him feveral Inftruftions relating 
jto the Exercife of his Jurifdic~fion. And the fame 
Apoftle tells Titus, Chap. 1.5. That for this caufe 
he had left him in Crete, that he fhould ordain El- 
ders in every City-, as he had appointed him : And. 
fends him feveral Directions for the Governing of 
that Church. Befides that it is well known, that 


Episcopacy Afferted. 43 

they both actually performed the Office of Bifhops, 
whilft they continued in thofe Diftrifts. And not 
only fo, but if thofe Bifhops happen'd to die before 
them, the Apoftles conftituted others in their room, 
that the Succeffion might not fail j as appears, be- 
fides St. Simeon, in feveral of the Afiatick Bilhops 
in the time of St. John. 

3. That it was the Cuftom of the Apoftles, 
when they perceived a Church well fettled, and 
the Divine Providence called rhem to plant the 
Gofpel in another place \ 2nd they thought they 
fhould fee the Face of that Flock no more$ to 
leave there fome j heir ableft, w\ molt zea- 

lous DifcipleS} and h appoint hirft to he Bilhop 
in their room-, to prefide o^ejp the Clergy, and 
have the chief Adminiflration of Jkciefaftical Af* 
fairs. Whereof we meet with a fair Example in 
St. John the Apoftie and EvangeHft.' . The In- 
fpe&ion of the Afiatick Churches had been com- 
mitted to him, and he had governed them a long 
time ^ as we have intimated before, in Per ion. Rut 
the Emperor bomitian condemned him to. B 
ment : Or, as fome fuggeft, forefeeing what would 
befai him, he withdrew into the Ifland of Pathmos 
in the Archipelagic ^ and left Timothy, or his Suc- 
celTor, to fupply his Place at Ephefm, Naw ii is 
generally agreed amongft the CftutcfcHiftorians, 
that one of them two was Bifhop of that Diftrift, 
whilft the Apoftie was under Confinement in that 
Ifland, What ! was it becaufe there was no pthef 
Paftor in the Province of Ephejus, that, lab' 
in it ? Nothing lefs ^ but he is particularly taken 
notice of amongft the reft, by reafon he filled the 
Chair in St. Johns abfence, as the firft Mihifter of 
that Church, which he had left to him to govern 
in chief, as he had done $ and whom he found 
there, when he returned to it from Pathmos, to re- 
fume the Functions of his Apoftlefhip > whereby 


44 1^ e Divine Right of 

he was made as it were a Tranfcendenr, and Uni- 
verfal Bifhop of the Churches in that Province. 
Which is the ground why the Spirit, who re- 
vealed to the Apoftle what paiTed there, and what 
would befal his Subftitute, if he did not fo and 
fo ^ ftiles him the Angel of the Church of Ephefus y 
Rev. ii. i. 

4. That not only St. John, but alfo the other 
Apoftles, ufed thatCuftom^ fettling towards the. 
end of their Courfe, or when they were called to 
remote Parts, or were likely to be hindered from 
their Function by any Accident ^ fome one or more 
of their chief Difciples, if there was occafion, as 
Bifhops in their Churches ^ being the moft proper 
for that Work, as having learned from them, how 
they were to Govern the Church of Chrift^ and 
been Eye-witneiTes of their Conduct, and Hearers 
of their Difcipiine. And for an irrefragable Proof 
of this, we fee that being fo appointed by the 
Apoftles, they filled the firft Places in their re- 
fpe&ive Churches ; appearing at the Head of their 
Clergy, and adminiftring Affairs in chief. Wit- 
nefs, befides thofe before mentioned, St. Clemens 
at Rome, St. Ignatius at Antioch, St. Folycarp at 
Smyrna, and his contemporary Bifhops in Ajia y 
tvho all took upon them the Title of Bifhops-, and 
diftinguifh'd themfelves Perfonally from the reft 
of the Clergy, as being the principal Governours 
of the Churches of their Diftrifts. And if thofe 
SuccefTors of the Apoftles enjoyed a Degree of 
Pre eminency above the other Minifters, with whom 
they edified their Churches * and if all Primitive 
Antiquity has look'd upon them as Bifhops, whilft 
it gives but the Name of Presbyters, or Deacons, 
to chofe who were aiTociated with them in the 
Work of the Miniftry 5 (which is a matter of Fa&, 
that cannot be eonteited, without contradicting 
the Writings of the Fathers of the firft Ages of 

Chriftianity h 

Episcopacy Afjferted. 45 

Chriftianlty 5 as I (hall have occafion hereafter to 
fhew-,) what likelihood is there, that they would 
affume to themfeives the Quality of Bifhops, and 
caufe themfeives to be thus diftinguifh'd from 
their Clergy, if they had not learned this Diftin- 
ftion from their Matters ? Would they confpire 
unanimoufly together, to overthrow the eftabliih'd 
Government of the Church > Or could they make 
all at once, and in the very firft Generation, fuch 
a notable Change in the Difcipline > Is not this^ 
in effe£t, to offer the higheft Violence and In- 
pftice to thofe Apoftolical Men, to accufe them 
of fuch an Innovation ? Would not fome one or 
other, at leaft, have flood up againtl it ? And 
would not this DiftinQicn of I3i(hop, from Prefc 
byter, and Deacon, which the fojmer had intro- 
duced to build their Superiority and Dignity upon, 
have occafioned a Nolfe in the Church ? Yet all 
thefe things pafs quietly and peaceably, and go 
on in their ordinary courfe : Antioch has its Bi- 
fhop, Ephefus has its Bifhop, Smyrna, Magnefia, 
Tralles, and Philadelphia : And the other Mini- 
fters, who ferve with them in thofe Churches, are 
fimply Presbyters, or Deacons. What can be con- 
cluded from all this, but that the Apdfties taught 
their SucceiTors fuch a Form of Gover 
that, left there fhould be a Schifm . in 

the Churches, by that curfed Ambition, which too 
naturally fets each Paftor upon appropr: 
to himielf «, they had taken care betimes to ap- 
point one, who fhould be the principal Re£t 
it: To the end, by that means, the or 1 : 
fters might be kept within Bounds, and not di- 
vide the Body of Chrift. In following therefore 
the Hierarchical Form, the SucceiTors of the 
ftles did but follow their Precept, and Exari 
So far from innovating any thing in ihQ Ecclefia- 
ftical Government ! Which could not have been 


^6 The Divine Rights/ 

done without great Heats 5 whereof fome Foot- 
fteps would appear in the Hiftory of thofe Times. 
But iince, on the contrary, we fee nothing but an 
unanimous Confent amongft all thofe holy Men, 
as to the chufing of a Paltor, who fhould be the 
Chief in his Churchy and fhould be acknowledged 
for the Bifnop thereof, in Contradiftin&ion to the 
reft of the Clergy 5 and that they themfelves were 
willing to be fo fpecified : It is evident, they con- 
tinued fuch a Succeffion by an Apoftolicai Tradi- 
tion $ and that they therein did but tread in the 
Paths of their Forerunners and Founders. 


A Particular Proof of the Apoftolicai In- 
Jiitution of Epifcopacy^ in the Person 
of St. James Bijhop of Jerufalem. 

THE preceding Argument makes out, I pre- 
fume, that the SucceiTors of the Apoftles 
continued the Epifcopal Government in the Church, 
by a Tradition which they had received from them. 
Which is very true ^ but is not all the ground they 
went upon. They did not fo only by that Princi- 
ple, which yet might have been fufficient^ but 
they were moreover induced thereunto by the very 
Praftice of the Apoftles, who themfelves had put 
it in Execution. And to come to particular, and 
diltinft Proofs of this 5 I fhall give here a very plain 
Inftance, which will (hew us, that Epifcopacy is 
of Apoftolicai Inftitution$ and that the Diftin&ion 
of Minifters in the Church, was fettled by them 


Episcopacy Averted. 47 

in the very beginning*, viz. That of St. James, the 
Son of Jofepb or Alpbeus , and of his firft Wife 
Salome-, commonly called rbe Jufi, and the Left. 
This Man, out of a particular refpeft to our Lord's 
Family, was conftituted the rlrft Bifhop of Jeru- 
falem by the Apoftles themfelves, in Contri- 
diftin&ion to the other Paftors, who ferved with 
him in that Church • and to themfelves likewife, 
who were never ltiled Bifhops of Jeru falem •, that 
Character being peculiar to St. James during his 
Life. Now that that ApolUe ( for he was a fe- 
condary one, though none of the Twelve) was 
chofen to be Bifhop there, and that he was the 
firft fettled in that See, in that Quality, by the 
Apoftles j we have cheTeftimony of three Faith- 
ful Writers, viz. Hegejippus, Clemens Alexandria 
nus, and Eufebius. They all agree in it * : But 
the fecond fpeaks thus of it 5 " That though Peter, 
" James, and John, after our Saviour's Afcenfion, 
" were by our Lord raifed to the higheft Dignity : 
' : Yet they did not contend among themfelves 
" about that Honour-, but chofe James the Juji 
' e Bifhop of Jerufalem. What is the Meaning of 
thefe Words'? Why, certainly Clemens, and after 
him Eufebius, would acquaint us ^ that though 
Peter, James, and John, were more eminent rhzn 
the other Apoftles, after the Afcenfion c . :rd, 

upon the account of their greater Gifts j which 
makes Clemens &y there, t ct That our Lord, after 
M his Refurrc&ion, gave the Gift of Knowledge 
tc to James the Ju(i 7 and to John, and to Voter *, 
<! and" they to the reit : Yet thefe two aid 

not take upon them the Primacy of Jerufalem, 
out of refpe£l to the Family of the other. 
that having, with the other Apoftles, eftablifh'cL 

* Hegefip. apud Eufeb. Hifr. E 2. cap 2 

Clera. Alex, Ibid, lib. 2, cap. i> 

48 The Divine Right of 

James the Lefs Bifhop of that See *, they con- 
fider'd him, even whilft they were a&ually with 
him, as Bifhop of the whole Body of that Church $ 
to whom appertained the Throne of it, as * Eufe- 
blus expreffes it. This muft be the natural Senfe 
of thele two Authors, and no other. Which (hews 
us plainly, that Epifcopacy was a diftinguifh'd 
Dignity in the very time of the Apoftles ^ and 
that they yielded the Primacy to him, to whom 
the See of Jerufalem did belong, viz. St. James^ 
fumamed the Juft ^ who was thereunto chiefly 
promoted, becaufe he was our Lord's next Kinf- 
man. There is no Man can reflect upon thefe 
PalTages, but he muft allow this to be the true 
Meaning of them. Otherwife let any one explain 
to me, what Hegejippus has underftood, when he 
faid, t " That James received the Adminiftration 
" of that Church from the Apoftles. And to the 
fame erTeQ Clemens, and Eufebius, || u That the Apo- 
" files chofe, or conftituted him Bifhop of Jeru- 
" falem. Doubtlefs the Apoftles thereby conferr'd 
on him a Primacy, which they would by no means 
encroach upon ^ well knowing it could belong but 
to one, if a good Order was obferved. For if they 
were all to lhare equally the Primacy, and Epif- 
copacy in that Church ^ what had they a mind to 
heftow upon him, when they made him Bi(hop of 
Jerufalem ^ and refufed to contend with him about 
that Office there > : Certainly their plain Intention 
was, to give him in that refpecl: a Degree of Emi- 
nency above them •, and as long as they remain 
with him there, they will look upon him in that 
Church as their Bifhop, and Primate. This is 
what Hegejippus, Clemens Alexandrinus, and Eu- 
febius relate concerning St. James the Juft, and the 

* Eufeb. Hift. Ecclef. lib. 2. c. 23. f Ibid. 

t| Supra. 


Episcopacy JJferted. 49 

Le/s h writing the Hiftory of the Eftablifliment 
and Government of the Chriftian Church in its 
Birth, and under the Eyes of the Apoftles. And 
it is to be obferved, that they report this Fa£t, as 
having happened after our Bleffed Saviour's Afcen- 
fwn into Heaven, viz. Soon after he had inftituted 
the Evangelical Miniftry, and the Paftors began to 
exercife their feverai Functions. 

But becaufe we have to do with Men, who will 
fcarce allow the Accounts of the Primitive Fathers, 
the common Credit of Faithful Relations 5 I (hall 
argue in this cafe from the Hiftory of the Net* 
Tejiament, and what^we meet with there concern- 
ing this matter. I fay then, that the Book of the 
Afts of the Apo files obliges us to confider S^.James^ 
as Bifhop of the Church of ' Jerufalem , in two 
feverai places, (Chap. xv. and.xxl.) In the for- 
mer, the Apoftles, and Elders meet in Council at 
Jerufalem, to compofe a great Diffention which 
was rifen at Antio-h about obferving the Law ot 
Mofes y particularly £S to Circumcifion, which' forr»« 
infilled upon. Wherein two things are very n 
markabie, in the Proceedings of that famous Af- 
fembly : Whereof one is, that St. Peter fpe tks the 
firft, to open the way to their Confultatio; , '.bote 
the Queftion propofed^ and the other, thjp Sx.Jc n 1 
does it the laft, to coilecl: their Deliberation j 
deliver the decretory Sentence of the C 
St. Peter, becaufe he was one of the eldefl 
Iters of the Gofpel^ and one of the Apoftles, 1* 
had the greateft Talents : For St. Peter , St. James ^ 
and St. John, (as I intimated before) 1 for 

the moft Excellent amongft them. As there- 
fore they were upon a Point of great Nicety at 
that time, wherein the Minds of the Jews, and of 
the Chriftians were ro be difcreetly dealt with - 3 
and the Synagogue was to be honour- 'ed$ 

as St, Auflin fomewhere elegantly expiefifes it 5 


50 The Divine Right of 

and yet the Aflembly was not to appear an Enemy 
to the Conffi tut ions ot that ancient (Economy ; 
St. Peter thought it proper for him, to endeavour 
to influence the Opinions of the others by his 
own. But St. fumes {peaks thelail^ becaufe that 
Council was held in hrs Churchy and it belonged 
to him of courie, as Primate, and Prefident, to 
gather the Votes •, and declare his judgment, and 
what is determined. This Conciliary way of 
Sr. James, as it is related in that xv ch Chapter of 
the Alls, (hews evidently, that he afted then as the 
Bifhop, who preiided in the matters which were 
treated of in his Church : Wherein that Affembly 
being held, he has had the honour of having been 
the Head of the firft, the moft holy, and the molt 
perfect: of all the Councils in theChriftian World. 
In the latter place, Chap. xxi. St. Paul is repre- 
fented as going in unto Sc. James 5 at whofe Houfe 
all the Elders, it is laid, were prefent : By whom 
he is exhorted to purifie him/elf, upon a Complaint 
made to them, That he taught all the Jews^ who 
were among the Gentiles, to j or fake Mofes •, and 
that they were not to Qrcumcift their Children^ 
neither to zoaifc after their Quftoms. What he does 
the next Day, to comply with the Advice of that 
Allen Upon which I make rhe tallowing Re- 

>ns. 1. That Si. James is therein diftinguifh'd 
from the Elders of the Church v tor St. Paul goes 
in unto him, and all the Eiders are prefent at his 
Houfe : Which is not put in there without ground. 

2. That it was doubtlefs Sr. James, that (ummon'd 
thefe latter to him,* and prefided in that AITembly. 

3. That St, Paul fhews himfelf willing to comply 
with what is determined amongft them, in a Point 
which grates upon his Mind, and wherein the ve- 
ry Doctrine of the Gofpel is concerned. All this 
implies the Pre-eminency of St. James; and carries 
iomething with it of the Authority and Functions 


Episcopacy Afferted. 5 1 

cF Epifcopacy. The iacred Hifiorian makes 1 plain 
DiftipSton between S:. James, and the Eiders of 
the Church of Jerufalem^ (whether they wereBi- 
fhops, or fingle Presbyters, or feme of both, is not 
material here) and fets him at the Head of them -, 
giving him the Power to call them together ^ or 
they coming of courfe, out of refpect to his Cha- 
racter, to meet with him at his Houfe, and to re- 
ceive St. Paul there. Why did not fome other 
convene them, and do what is here related > And 
why is no other Name particularly mentioned, 
but St. James's* Can any Man believe, that S:.Pau/ 7 
zpbo was not a i^kit behind the very chief Apoftles y 
2 Cor. xi. 5. fhould obediently fubmit in 'fuch a 
matter, to the Advice of the Clergy of Jerufalem^ 
he who was fo much above them, by his Office, 
Parrs, and Succels in the Gofpei ? If he had r 
lean at their Head a Perfon of fuch an eminent 
Dignity, and fuch 'a powerful Authority by his 
Epifcopacy, and Primacy, as was St. James : He 
would never certainly have yielded to puriiie him- 
felf, according to the Mofaical Law, 
with the Clamours of the Jews, of who 
Church of Jerufalem did then coniift^ he who \ 
already Preacrfd its Abrogation ^ if he b 
fidered St.James^ who with the reft pivifed him 
to it, as in a diftinguifh'd , and fuperior btai.ioa 
there. Whether he was in the righr, to pay thai 
Deference to his, and the AfTembiy's Determina- 
tion, as to the Point in Queftion> This is not the 
place to inquire. Bur [till it is certain, that it 
was the Character St. James froxe in that rirftChri- 
ftian Church •, which was founded foon after the 
glorious Afcenfior. of our Lord iato Heaven 3 and 
wherein the Apoitles held their tirfl Council ; that 
prevailed upon him to do what he did : And what 
probably he would not have .done, if only the reft 
Qf the Clergy had fo opined, and advifed. But a 

E 2 Bifhop 

$ 7 The Divine Right of 

Bifhop in his See, and as Clemens, and Eufeb'iui 
fpeak, the Bifhop of Jerujalem 5 declaring to him, 
that he judged it fit, for the quieting the Minds 
of the weak Jews •, who would otherwife be much 
fcandalized, if they faw him thus defpife the Or- 
dinances of Mofes\ that he mould yet comply 
with thofe Inftitutions: He yielded to the Judg- 
ment of lb eminent a Perfon , he purified him- 

But after all, what likelihood is there, that both 
Hegefippus, and Clemens Alexandrinus^ and Eufebius, 
and likewife the other Hiftorians, who have had 
occafion to mention it in the following Centuries 5 
fhould all agree, without the Publicks contra- 
dicting it, or any one Writer in thofe Ages, that 
I know of; to call St. James the firft Bilhop of 
Jerufalem^ and to allure us, that theApoftles con* 
(tituted him in that Dignity ? For fo do Sopbromus, 
Bede, ~Nicephorus, Callift. &c. Is Epifcopacy a new 
Office, which they have devifed in their Minds, 
to afcribe it to Si. James? Or who taught them 
to fpeak in that Stile, to fo little purpofe, if it 
was not true ? What Reafon could they have, to 
give him the Title of Bifhop of the Church of Je- 
rujalem 5 and to tell the World, that he was the 
firft that filled that Chair , if he had nothing above 
the other Paftors, who ferved with him there > 
Had they a mind to crofs the Ufage of thofe Times, 
wherein it is pretended, that all the Minifters 
were Equal} or that the Bifhop, and the Preshyicr 
were the f^mQ, or that all the Presbyters were 
Bifhops > We muft give the Lye to all Ecciefiafti- 
cal Antiquity •, and accufe its.feveral Writers with 
having been ignorant of the Affairs of the Apofto- 
licai Times, and their own •, or to have difguifed 
them willingly, on purpofe to favour a No.vel ty. 
And we muft fay in particular, that Eujebius fuf- 
fex'd himfelf to be impofed upon by falfe Me- 
moirs * 

Episcopacy AJfertcd. 5 3 

moirs$ if it be not true, that St. James the Jufl^ 
or the LeJs, held an eminent Dignity in the Church 
of Jerufalem. Certainly all thofe good Men would 
never have affirmed it, if they had not had fome 
ground for it ^ or they would have been very fhy 
to have fpoken it 5 if fuch a Diftin£tion had nor. 
been ufed, and well known in their refpective 
Times. Now thisArricular FaO: was fo clear, 
and fo publickly avWd in thofe firft Ages of the 
Church $ that our Hiftorian, in his EcclefiafikaJ 
Jtiiflory, does not mark indeed the very Year, in 
which St. James was inftituted Bi(hop of Jerufa- 
lem by the Apoftles $ and how long he held that 
See. But what is as much 5 treating of the Ri- 
fhops of Jerufalem, from the Afcenfion of our 
Lord, to the Reign of the Emperor Adrian*-, he 
gives us a Catalogue, or Lift of them, to the 
Number of Fifteen : Whereof he relates the Names, 
and Extraction j and puts a': the head of them 
St. James, as he who firft came into that See. If 
he had delivered fuch a thing out of his own Fan- 
cy ^ what would he have palled for in the Opi- 
nion of the World, to lay down a Matter of Fa£t 
fo untrue 5 and fo contrary, as we are told, to the 
Chriftian Difcipline ! But that no Man may doubt 
of his Fidelity therein, he declares pofifively, That 
he had gather'd that Catalogue out of the Records 
of the Ancients ^ though he could not find there 
the precife Time, or Duration of their Epifcopats. 
Notwuhftanding, he allures us, that there were 
Fifteen of them within that Period 5 all Hebrews by 
Defcent, and Men of Merit : 'Whereof he gives us 
the Names one after* another. The Fathers there- 
fore of the firft Ages of Chriftianity prove, or at 
leaft undeniably confirm, what the New Teftament 
lets us underftand, viz. That in that very time 

* Eufeb. Hift. Ecclef. lib. 4. c. 5, 

E 3 there 

54 Tita D i v i n £ Right of 

there were Bifhops, dilringnifh'd from rhe other 
rafters in the Church. And they would never 
have fpoken of a Degree of Eminencv , in \t> 
fpeQ of St. Jatitts-, if it had been perfe8.1y un- 
known to them, and quue cut of ufe in their 

*It will pferhapS he alledged by our AdverfaHes, 
forc'd thereunco by the prev^fcog Evidence of the 
Telia mony of the Fathers-, <Wat Eufebuss w 
himfelf according to the Stile of hisTitrie, w 
in Epifcopkcy was already Fftabliflfd in the Chri- 
ftian Chuich % and a D;ftinCtion made between ft* 
flop, and Presbyter: And that lb all that can he 
/reflion is, that St. James was 
the fitit Pallor of the Church of Jcrujalem^ and 
whar the es ; /. e. that he 

called him I the Apo> 

files was c'nfcj ft Miniver in Order, or Pre- 

cedency ^ but that that ki rirnacy gave him 

no Pre-eminency, Superiority, or Authority, zhoxe 
the other Presbyters, who were Equal with him 
in Degree. But befides that they allow thereby, 
that in the tirhe of Eujebius, which was in the 
beginning of the fourth Cenrnrv, viz. Two Ages, 
and ibmewhat more, after the Death of rhe Apo- 
fbop fjgnified a peculiar Dig- 
nity : He cites the very words of fei'ne, who fol- 
i them pretty near ;efipf>us, and C/e- 

mews - Alexatidrinus \ who both itiied him that held 
the See <£*JcruJdiern, Btffeop thereof. From that 
. ;. r, iiom the Age .of the Apoftles 
Difciplts, or Sueceffors ^ the Name 

of Bi \i uiec! to denote an eminent Dignity 

jn the Church. And thar Dignity could not be of 
Order, or Precedency-, but or Degree: For fuch a 
one may charge its Subject ^ and he that is to day 
Vrimus inter fares, may not he fo to morrow, 
according to tha it are his 

Episcopacy Ajferted. 5 5 

Equals. Whereas that of Bifnop, which is afcribed 
to the Primates of Jcrufalem •, did nor change its 
Subject, but by Death : And nothing but that^ or 
a collective fuperior Authority, upon the account 
of Herefie, Schifm, or grievous Scandal ^ could de- 
prive him of ir, who was in vetted with that Cha- 
racter •, according to that received Maxim, $upe- 
rior ab Inferiori nonfyoteft jucl'icari. Moreover, I 
defire them, that th^jfcwould fhew me, when the 
Term of Bifhop changed its ufual Signification h 
and when Epifcopacy began, between the time of 
the Apoftles, and Eufebius, to denote a Degree of 
Eminency > I doubt, they will find it very difficult, 
if not altogether impoifthle, to it. But 

if they could do iha V me 

likewife, when the Nan "need 

to be appropriated to t 1 

exclufively to ail the o even 

that in the Apoftolical Tinrws 
called Bijhops, and vice verfj ' • Id tnat be 

to the Queft.ion > It will indeed thereby 3; 
that the words may have changed their 
tion, but the Thing remained , viz. the 
For call him Bifliop, or Primate, or Pre 
you will} who by Right of Ordination, [nltitu- 
tion, or Succedion, is ar the Head ol ergy 

•for Lite : Provided he has the Power ro perform 
Sr. James, and his Succefiors m the See of 
-■ did, in relation to the Government of 
Lis Church h I have all I defire. For a Bifhop is 
nothing eife, but he who by a Lawful Call, and 
tike that of St. James, and his Succeffors, is feated 
for his Life in the Chair of Primate, to perpetuate 
the Minifiry in his Church, and as its 

principal Paftor, by a pure I 
Difcipline. Which is the Idea v 
of St. James, and of all thof 
of firft Miniltcrs of the Church, hold an Epifcopal 


$6 The Divine Right of 

See. For in fhort, we muft overthrow the Tefti- 
xnony of Antiquity, to fay nothing of Scripture, 
if we do not allow St. James a Degree of Pre- 
eminency, by virtue of his Primacy in the Church 
of Jerujalem, in which he was fettled by a par- 
ticular Appointment of the Apoftles. 

, j- 


A T articular Proof of the Apofolical In- 
ft it ut ion of Epifcopacy, and its Sue- 
ceffion y in the Perfon of St. Simeon 
Bijhop of Jemfalem. 

IF the Inftallation of St. James^ as I may term it, 
in the Chair of Jerufalem by the Apoftles, be 
a Demonftration of the Apoftolical Inftitution of 
Epifcopacy ; The Promotion of St. Simeon to that 
See, is a good Evidence of their Intention to hate 
it continued in the Chriftian Church 5 fince they 
themfelves-appointed him Bifhop there, after the 
Death of his Predeceflbr. It is a remarkable Facl, 
which I think proper to relate after the foregoing, 
as ufhering in the Method of filling up a vacant 
See in the time of the Apoftles, and after their 
Death, in the firft Ages of Chriftianity. And we 
have it Recorded ( befides t Hegejippus\ Simeon's 
almoft Contemporary) by the Ecclefiaftical Hifto- 
rian * Eufebius^ with fome Enlargement. " It is 
" reported, fays he, that the Apoftles, and the 

t Hegefip. apud Eufeb. Hid Ecclef. lib. 4. cap. 22. 
J Ibid, lib, 3. cap. n. 


Episcopacy Afferted. 57 

w Difciples of our Lord, who were yet living, 
" with his Kinfmen according to the Flefti ^ had 
" a Confutation, who was fie to fucceed St. James ^ 
" and that they unanimoufly pitch'd upon Simeon 
" for that Chair, as being our Saviour's Kinf- 
" man. 

St. James had been conftituted Bifhop of Jeru- 
falem^ as we have feen before : And he governed 
that Church till the Day of his Martyrdom in 
that Quality. For though the Apoftles affembled 
together often there, before they feparated them- 
felves, to go and plant the Gofpel throughout the 
Worlds they had appropriated it to him, as the 
chief Paftor of it. But ioon after his Deceafe, 
came on the Ruin of that Noble City, by the Ro- 
man Armies, under the Command of Titus^ the Son 
of Vefpafianus. As there was in it a famous 
Church, which was honoured with the Prefence of 
the Apoftles, and of the Councils, that from time 
to time met there, to treat of the Affairs of Re- 
ligion j it received a terrible Blow by that fatal 
War : But it was not wholly ifh'd in the 

general Defolation^ the Divine Piovidence pro- 
viding for its Prefervation in a wonderful manner. 
For there remained in the Places about the City 
a good Number of Chriftians, who had efcaped 
the Fury of the Romans. Which was the Reafon 
that the Apoftles, and the Difciples of T 
Chrift, who were then alive ^ confidering amongft 
themfelves, that the See of that Mother-Ch 
was vacant by the Death of Sr. James 5 repaired 
thither, with the Kinfmen of our Lord, according 
to the Flefh, to fill it up with a fit Succe* 7 . 
unanimoufly to eftablifh Biftiop there Simeon^ 

the Son of C as they aftually did. Thus£#- 

febius. But it feems more probable, that Simeon 
was Bifhop of Jerufalem betore its Deftrutlion, 
immediately upon the Death of Sujcwes, 


$8 The Divine Right of 

which happen'd fome Years before $ and that the 
Chriftians withdrew to Fella. 

Two things are obfervable from this Promotion, 
and Election of Simeon to be Bifhop of Jerufalem. 
The firft is, That in the very rime of the Apoftles, 
when an Epifcopal See became vacant by the Death 
of its Primate-, one of the Clergy was appointed 
to be his SucceflTor^ who was called the Bifhop 
of chat Church. For to imagine, that in the Days 
of Sz. James ^ and Simeon^ there were no orher 
Paftors in the Church of Jerufalem ^ is what no 
Man of Reafon ever can j or has been affirmed 
of fuch a Body by any of our Divines. There 
was <hen one chofen amongft that Clergy, to be 
the Biftiop of that See. The firft was St. James^ 
and the fecond Simeon, who was raifed to that 
Dignity by a Council, made up of the Apoftles, 
and the Difciples of our Lord that were then 
alive, with his Kinfmen according to the Flefh ^ 
and who with one accord feated him in the Epif- 
copal Chair. 

The fecond thing to be obferved is, That in the 
time of the Apoftles, when an Epifcopal See was 
vacant-, they firft, and in chief, with the Difci- 
ples of our Lord, ufed to affemble together, to 
chufe, and admit the Paftor, whom they judged {it 
for that Dignity : At leaft it happen'd fo in this 
Cafe. It was the fuperior Clergy, who had the 
Right, and Authority fo to do $ fuch as were the 
Apoftles firft, and in chief, with thofe whom the 
Gofpel names the 'Difciples of our Lord-^ and his 
Kinfmen according to the Flefh, particularly men- 
tioned here honoris caufa. Neither the Church 
in a Body, nor* the Presbyters, and Deacons -, nor, 
in a word, the inferior Clergy, in thofe Days, had 
the Power to appoint, or ordain a Bifhop. For 
if they had had it$ what neceflity was there, when 
the Epifcopal See of Jerufalem, ex,gr. became va- 
cant , 

Episcopacy Ajferted. 59 

cant} that the Apoftles who remained, and the 
Difciples of our Lord, with his Kinfmen according 
to the Fie(h 5 fhould meet fo folemnly together 
for that end ? The Church in a Body j or the Pa- 
ftors, and ordinary M in iters, might have done ic 
themfeives-, and their Proceedings therein would 
have been Regular, and in Form, according to the 
Hypothefis or our Adverfaries. Notwithstanding, 
it is tranfacted here otherwife: A Council of A po- 
tties, and Diiciptes refort together, to ettablifli 

But let us return co the Apoftolica! InSitution 
of Epifeptcy, £nd an in the Perfon of 

Simeon. It * Church 

of J err I .it might b 

was a pecui K\ itles 

confer rent 

Station ttnfro tt gft tteeaa . Anr that this particuiai: 
es RKn cirv*e, that thislafti vas 

to p Rut here is Shnsen, who fuc- 

ceeds fei eights, Pre-eminencies, and 

Alii- xh\ r by the Appointment of the 

I to inftitute him into this high 
Office, <he Apoftles ufc the fame Formalities, ss 

th* Initiation of Sr. J*nze*. For ; 
Man being dead:, they, with the Difcipies, who 
:1 alive after the facking of JerujaL 
Lord's Kin fee n according to t&e Fit. 
Tom divers parrs thither : And hav 
n worthy to fill the Chair, they ch 
\ and ordained him to he the Bifhop 
chief Paftor'of that Chuxch, in th< 
I^edecelTor of glorious Memoiy. 1 :ve 

is the Account Eufebi:<s gives of it in his E 
.:./ Hi ry he had Read it in the Re- 
s of the fecoad, and third of the 

Church- Whereby .<:rs, thai Simon was 

fitted by the fame F ier, 


60 The Divine Right of 

and with the fame Formalities, as St. James had 
been. Not by all the Pallors, and Minifters, who 
were in Ju&ea, and elfewhere : But only by the 
Apoftles firft, and in chief, with the Difciples of 
our Lord, and his Kinfmen according to the Fiefh ^ 
to whom alone, it feems, appertained then the 
Right of fo doing. It was they that authorized, 
and confirmed by fuch a Proceeding the Epifcopal 
Succeflion in that Church : That there might be 
continued in after- Ages one Paftor amongft the 
reft, who fhould be at the Head of his Clergy h 
and fhould be the Bifhop, Primate, and chief ReSor 
of the See, unto which he was appointed. We 
may gather likewife, from the fame Account, That 
Simeon held the See of Jerufalem about forty 
three Years ^ i. e. till his Death : An evident fign, 
that Epifcopacy was an Office for Life ^ and not a 
Primacy of Order, or Precedency, which might be 
changed the very next Day. 'It was a permanent 
Dignity, wherewith a Man was invefted for as 
long as he lived, by thofe who had a Right to 
confer it. If our Adversaries deny it, they muft 
be wilfully Blind, and believe nothing of what is 
read in the Ecclefiaftical Hiftorians, wherein that 
Fa£t is as clear as the Light. But if Eufebius 
afcribes to him fo long a PolTefTion of the Chair 
of Jerufalem , in fuch troublefome Times, and 
wherein the Perfecution raged fo furioufly againft 
the Chriftians $ * hegefippus^ who flourifh'd about 
that time, gives him the longeft Life of all the Bi- 
Ihops : For he makes him live a hundred and twen- 
ty Years, and die in the tenth Year of Trajan's 
Reign. Which we may fee likewife in thetQra- 
nicle of the fame Author : And confequently he 
held out till the beginning of the fecond Century, 

* Hegefip. apud Eufeb. Hi ft. Ecclef. lib, 3, cap. 32. 
f Eufcb. Chron. Am?. 107. 


Episcopacy Afferted. 6\ 

viz. till about an hundred and feventeen Years af- 
ter the Birth of our Redeemer. 

I will now explain, as being an Hm a BU 
Illuftration of the matter I am now fl }op was con- 
upon, the Method how the Apoftles, fecrated, and 
and their Succeffors after them, filled EflablM in 
up a vacant See, in the firft Ages of r'Js™*™ 
Chriftianity ^ and how they Confe- 
crated a Bifhop. For this is a thing fit to be 
handled here, as proving collaterally, that Epifco- 
pacy bears Date with the Apoftolical, and Primi- 
tive Times : The Manner of the Inftitution, is a 
plain Evidence of the Inftitution it felf, and of the 
Diftinftion of the Degrees in the holy Miniftry. 
When a See then was vacant, and a Bifhcp was 
to be Confecrated ; the Apofttes, and the Diiciples 
of our Lord, in the beginning •, and afterwards the 
Succeffors of the Apoftles, Siz. the Bifhops, were 
wont to meet together, from* the Neighbouring 
Diftri&s, to chufe a .fit ?erfon«, and to perform 
the Ceremony of his Confecration, and 
To which end, befides the Clergy, the a led 
the People, to know their Opinion, and 
Approbation of his Character. And when they 
faw, that he was well reported of, and was ac- 
ceptable to the Church in general : Having the 
neceffary Qualifications to hold thai See, as Ta- 
lents, Piety, Zeal ^ the firft Minifters am >ngft 
them Confecrated him to that Office, by the InV 
pofition of their Hands. Which Formalities being 
duly obferved, he was look'd upon as Eftablifh'd 
in that Church, to Govern ic as its principal Pa- 
ftor : And the reft of the Clergy, with the People,, 
were to be obedient to him ^ as to whom belonged 
the Right of the Chair. It is true, the Gofpel 
does not give us a particular Account of all the 
Circumftances of fuch a Tranfa£lion. But befides 
that we are bound in Reafon to believe, that every 


62 The DivinePughto/' 

one a£ted therein according to his Station : It lets 
us know enough to make us undaltand, that u 
was the Apoftlts that called the Church together 5 
that the lower Clergy were only Affiftarus at their 
Devotions ^ that the People gave (imply their 
Opinion, and Approbation of the Perfon^ and that 
it was ihey (the Apoliles) laftly, that Inltituted 
him into that faered Function, by the Right they 
folely had of Confecrating him, and hying their 
Hands upon him. 

The fame thing is to be faid of the Confecra- 
tians, which after the Death of the Apoftles, were 
performed by their Succeffors, in the following 
.Ages of Chrifttanity. This is evident in fome 
meafure, not only as to theBiihops, in the Perfon 
of Matthias, who was chofen by the Apoftles into 
the place of the Traitor Judas, Alls i. and confe- 
quently to be an Apoftle, and a Bifnop at large : 
But alio as to the Deacons themfeives 5 whereof 
we have a remarkable Inftance, Acts vi. Upon the 
murmuring of the Grecians againft the Hebrews, 
that their Widows were neglected in the daily Mi- 
ntftration-, the Apoftles dire&ed the Brethren, to 
look out among them [even Men for that Imploy- 
ment. But though they were chofen by the Peo- 
ple, and prefented by them, at the DireQtion of 
the Apoftles $ yet becaufe thole Deacons were to 
be Ailiftants in the Miniftry, in Preaching the 
Word, and Adminiftring the Sacraments ; ic was 
neceffary, that to admit them to that Office, the 
Apoliles ihould lay their Hands on them «, as being a 
Right which belonged to them, in that Quality, or as 
Bishops. Now that there might be no doubt railed, 
that they muft be Bifhops, who were to confer 
the Order upon him that was to be lb $ and that 
that Point of Difcipline mould be Religioufly ob- 
ierved throughout the Chriltian Church in after- 
Ag ts ; The Apoliles did not only propofe their 


Episcopacy Ajferted. 63 

own Pra&ice *, but they made likewafe a Canon, 
to regulate the Formalities of that facred Cere- 
mony. It is that which is to be found amongft 
the true Apoftolical Canons *, extrafted out of the 
ancient Catholick Books. I know what is juftly 
thought of a Compilation, which goes under that 
Name. It is believed, and that with good reafon, 
that they were not all compofed by thofe holy 
Men : For it is not very difficult to point at the 
Date of fome of them in the Ages after them ^ 
and to fhew the faifity of others, that are contra- 
ry to the true ones, which they have left us in 
their Writings, and by Tradition. But if they 
have not made them all, it does not follow, but 
they may have made fome$ amongft which is this, 
which has been acknowledged for Apoftolical in 
the firft Ages of the Church. Unlefs we will dif- 
believe, without any colour of Reafon, what St. Cy- 
prian fays of it \ who lived in the beginning of 
the third Century •, i. e. a little more than a hun- 
dred Years after the Death of the Apoftles. For 
he lays it down pofitiveiy, and exprefly, that the 
Apoftles enafted fuch a Canon concerning the Or- 
dination of a Bifhop in the Church, that it is of 
Divine Tradition, and Apoftolical Observation ^ 
and that it has been generally qbferved from Fa- 
ther to Son. Thefe are his very words, t De Tra- 
ditione Divimi , & Apoftolka Objervatione. To 
which he adds, that it is a Rule to be kept, and 
held, as of Divine Ordinance, and Apoftolical Pra- 
Sice *, J] Diiigenter fervandum eft , 6? tenendum j 
viz. Ut ad Ordinationes rite celebrandas^ ad cam 
Flebem cut Prtpofyus Ordinatur^ Efifcopi ejufdem 
Previncitf prow mi qui que convenianl, iff Epif co- 
pus deligatur. And to (hew n. that it was 
obferved in his time, as coming from the Apoftles ^ 

* Can, Apofl. I. t Cyp, Epift. 68. bid? 


64 The Divine Right of 

and that that was the conftant Cuftom of the 
Churchy he commends the Bifhops, who had fet- 
tled Sabinus in the place of Bafi/ides, that had been 
depofed upon the account of his Crimes-, in that 
they had followed the Canon in all its Points ^ 
having all of that Province reforted to the Church, 
which was deftimte of a chief Paftor $ and called 
the People together, to have their Approbation of 
the Perfon, and confecrated Sabinus ^ and after 
they had laid their Hands on him, had committed 
to him the vacant See of Bafdides. All which 
Proceedings he confirms with his whole Clergy, 
as conformable to the Divine Ordinance, and the 
Apoftolical Practice. 

In that Synodical Letter of St. Cyprian appears, 
as clear as the Light of the Sun, the Diftinction 
between a Bifhop, and a Presbyter. It is plainly 
xcqu there, that from the Apoftles to the Days of 
that famous Primate of Carthage, it was the Bi- 
fhops that confecrated the Bifhops, for the Churches 
in which they were to Officiate. Fori think, thefe 
two Truths may be fairly concluded from the 
Words of that Letter, i. That if the Presbyters, 
and the Deacons, with the Body of the People, 
could have conftituted a Bifhop •, the Apoftolical 
Canon would not have obliged the Bifhops of 
the Province to refort to the place, to confecrate 
the Perfon. And if they had done it ^ St. Cyprian's 
Account tells us, that from the time of the Apo- 
ftles to him, the Bifhops were to confer the Or- 
der-, and that that was the conftant Cuftom of 
the Church, grounded upon a Divine, and Apo- 
ftolical Tradition. 2. That it being indifputable, 
that in the Days of that Primate, the Epifcopat 
was a diftincT: Office from the Presbyterat, and 
the Diaconat : When he fpeaks of the Promotion 
of Sabinus to the Epifcopat, he underftands it of 
a Degree diftinguifh'd from that of a Presbyter, 


Episcopacy Afferted. 6$ 

or a Deacon. For Sabinus was a Deacon, and a Pref* 
by ter, when he was made a Bifhop, upon the De- 
privation of Bajilides. And indeed it was a gene- 
ral Rule in the Church, that a Man was to be 
firft ordained Deacon, and then Presbyter ^ before 
he could afcend to the Epifcopal Dignity. 


A F articular Proof of the Apojlolkal In* 
Jiitution of Epifcopacy^ in the Perfon 
of St. Timothy Bijhop of Ephefus. 

HAving touch'd above bdt {lightly the Inftances 
of St. Timothy, and St. Titus % whereof the 
former was ordained by St. Paul, Bifhop of the 
Ephefians, and the latter of the Cretans * and thofe 
giving us a great Light into this matter of the Apo«r 
ftolical Inftitution of Epifcopacy, and of its Diftin- 
ftion from the Presbyterat,and the Diaconat « beiides 
that the account of them is to be found chiefly in 
the Canonical Books of the New Tefcament : I pre- 
fume, it will not contribute a little to my pur- 
pofe, if I eonfider them now more narrowly 3 and 

As to Timothy •, his Dignity in genual appears 
in this, that St. Paul chofe him to be his Compa- 
nion, and Fellow- worker, in his Travels, and La« 
bours for the Propagation of the Gofjpel, and the 
Edifying of the Body of Chfift : And the feveral 
Commiffions he imployed him in, in refpe£l of 
fome principal Churches-, fometimes appointing 
him to look to them in his abfence* fometimes, 

F refigning 

66 The Divine Right of 

refigning them up to his Care-, fometimes ordering 
him to govern thofe which he had already founded 5 
fometimes to fettle new ones.; now to provide 
them with Pdftors, then; to direcl them in the 
d'ifcharge of their Office $ to, Way at Berea, to go 
to Theffalonica , Macedonia^ hat particularly to 
prefide at Ephefus. Upon which fcore the Anci- 
ents generally affure us, that Timothy was the firft 
appointed Bifhop of Ephefus. 

The Author of the Martyrdom of Timothy, in 
Photius's Bibliotheca, tells us, a " That the Apoftle 
( for fo he is fometimes called ) " Timothy was or- 
" dained, and enthroned (or Inftalied), as it is 
there exprefTed, u Bifhop of the Metropolis of the 
feC Ephejians by the great St. Paul: And that he did 
cc firft aft as Bifhop of Ephefus. Eufebius fays, 
b cc That Timothy is ftoried to have been the firft Bi- 
<s fhop of the Province or Diocefe of Ephefus. In 
the Apoftolical Conftitutions, we are exprelly told 3 . 
" c That he was ordained Bifhop of it by St. Paul. 
And the Fathers of the Council of Chalcedon d , in- 
cluding Timothy in the Number, reckon twenty 
feven Bifhops of Ephefus to their Time. St. Cbry- 
foftom affirms, e cc That it is manifeft, that Tirno* 
u thy was entrufted with a Church, or rather with 
c * a whole Nation, that of Afia. And to him 3 
fays Theodore^ f c; Divine Sr. Paul committed the 
" the Care and Charge of Afia. Many other Te- 
ftimonies might be produced to the fame effecl y 
but, I prefume, thefe are fufficient. 

The Truth is, his Quality of Evangelift did not 
hinder, but he might be one of thofe Bifhops at 
large, who w T ent up and down the World, to help 

a Apud Phor. Biblioth. Num. 254. b Eufeb. lib. 3. c.4. 
c Conft. Apoft. lib. 7. c. 47. d Cone. Chalced. Aft. 11. 
* Chryfoft. Horn. 15. in 1 Tim. 5. *$. 
* Theodor. Arg. in 1 Tim. 

t out 

Episcopacy AJferted. 6f 

out the Apoltles in their Work ^ to Preach the 
Gofpel, and to Ordain, when duly Commiffioned 
thereunto, fuch Minifters in the Churches which 
were already gathered, as they judged neceffary 
and proper for the edifying of them. For with- 
out iuch an Ordination, none could come into the 
Miniftry, or perform holy Offices. Which may be 
allowed, befides their affifting in publi filing the 
Word, to have been the ground, if not of the firft 
Institution of the Evangelifts, yet of their being 
fent by the Apoftles to Churches already planted - v 
fuppoiing it was fo done. For according to the 
Word 'EuafygX/^ss-o/ , with the Notion of * Eufe- 
bim i " The Work of an Evangelift was, as of an 
Apoftle, " To lay the Foundations of the Faith in 
* c remote, and Barbarous Countries ^ to conixitute 
" them Paftors in their room : And after they had 
tc committed them to the Care of thofe new Plan- 
" tations, to pafs on to other Nations. As then 
the Minifterial Function was to be derived from 
the Apoftles, and they could not go every where $ 
they pitch'd upon the moft Pious, Eloquent, and Ex- 
cellent Perfons amongft the Faithful •, whom, after 
they had Coniecrated them, they Commiilioned to 
Preach the Gofpel, and to fettle Pattors from City 
to City. So that, the Apoftolical Succeilion being 
in part to be conveyed through them into thd 
Church-, they communicated it, with the iacred 
Orders, as they faw occafion. And confecjuently 
none could pretend to a lawful Million, or to par 
take of that Succeffion, but by the Hands of the 
Apoftles, or thofe their Deputies, and the Bifnops, 
Notwithftanding, this is no binderance, but Ti- 
r,:othy may have been a Bifhop, appropriated to 
the Church of Ephefus 5 no more than the Apofile- 
fhip of St. James) was an Obftacie to his Appro- 

% Xeb. Bifc Ecclef. lib, $. cap. 37. 

* t priatioS 

68 The D i v i n e R i g h t of 

priation to the Epifcopal See of Jerufalem. From* 
whence it is evident, that Timothy was both an 
Evangelift, and a Bifhop, properly fo called. He 
had then, in thefe refpeQs, fome Degree of Emi- 
nency, which fet him above the other Minifters ^ 
who, we cannot fay, were Equal with him, with- 
out being fenfible, that we fpeak too haftily, and 
fomewhat out of the way. 
: But to difcourfe a little more diftinftly ; The 
Epifcopal Dignity of Timothy is palpable in thefe 
three things, viz. i. In that St. Paul had ordained 
him to it, by the Impoiition of his Hands on him. 
i. In that he gave him the Power of Ordaining 
Minifters himfelf. And 3. In that he had a Jurif- 
dicYton committed to him over them. Which 
three Truths are grounded chiefly upon thefe three 
Paflages: Wherefore I put thee in remembrance^ 
that thou ftir up the Gift of God which is in thee, 
by the putting on of my Hands , 2 Tim. i. 6. Lay 
Hands fuddenly on no Man^ 1 Tim. v. 22* Againji 
an Elder receive not an Accufation 7 but before 
two or three Witnejfes^ 1 Tim. v. 19. If we con- 
fider thefe PalTages but fuperficially, they feem 
to give no great matter of Prerogative to Timo- 
thy* But if we make a Judicious Reflection up- 
on them, we (hall foon perceive, that they con- 
tain Much in Little, mighfty Things in few Words. 
For what a Divine Gift, what an Extraordinary- 
Spirit was bellowed upon Timothy at his Ordina- 
tion, by the Impofition of the Hands of St. Paul ? 
Could he confer on him a higher Honour in the 
Church, than to impart to him the Right of Com- 
municating the facred Orders ? And in Commif- 
fioning him to proceed as a Judge, in the Accufa- 
tions which fhould be brought before his Tribunal 
againft the Elders 5 does he riot inveft him with 
a powerful Jurifdi&ion over them, which made 
him much their Superior ? Thefe feveral Pre- 


Episcopacy Afferted. 6p 

eminencies ftamp upon him a truly Epifcopal Cha- 
racter -, which confifts in his deriving his Call 
from the Apoftles by Confecration, his Right of 
Ordaining Minifters himfelf, and his Power of Ju- 
rifdi£lion bver them. To which may J d .d, 
what Irenaus fays, * u That the Bifhops, w 
" ceeded the Apoftles, with their Succefiion iricb 
M their Bifhopricks, received a certain Gift of 
* c Truth, according to the good pieafure of th^ 
w Father: What may pafs for a Comment upon 
thefe PalTages. 

I fay, firft, That Timothy was by St. Paid! or- 
dained a Bifhop, as will farther appear from what 
is to follow •, and that by the Impofition of his 
Hands on him for that purpofe : For he himfelf 
tells him, Wherefore I put thee in remembrance^ 
that thou ft ir up the Gift of God which is in thee, 
by the putting &n of my Hands •, in the forecited 
place. To which I muft add, and Bifhop of Ephe- 
fus too. For the Apoftle tells him likewife, i Tim, 
j. 3. That he be fought him to abide ft ill at Ephefits y 
riycrju«vc^ cv 'Ecptcra, in the Original ♦, which figni- 
fies to re fide, or fix in Ephefus. So that I pre- 
fume, the former part of the Propoiition will fcarce 
be denied here by our yfeyerfaries. 

Objeff. But methinksfc hear them itart up an 
Objection, to invalidare this pretended Epifcopal 
Dignity, of Timothy, which I feern to ground upon 
the Impofition of the Hands of St. Paul alone. 
Is it not written, fay they, 1 Tim.iv. 14. Negletl 
not the Gift that is in thee, which was given thee 
by Prophefie, with the laying on of the Hands 
the Presbytery-, Elders, /. e. or Presbyters: M 
irmftiakois «r x^& v ^ HgtcrG-ifltgjis. Whence they 
infer, that it was no more St. Paul, than the other 
Presbyters, that ordained Timothy-, and that then 

J Ircn. adv. Har. lib. 4, cap. 4$. 

F 3 the 

jo The Divine Right of 

the Presbyters had a Right of Ordaining, as well 
as the Bifhops, or Apofties : Which they alledge, 
has been fince taken away from them by Ufurpa- 
tion, againft the Form of the firft Inftitution^ 
feeing the Company of the Presbyters laid their 
Hands on Timothy, with St. Paul, and not he a- 

Solut. How pitiful, and falfe are fuch Inferen- 
ces 5 if we confider the force of the PalTage it 
felf, and the Cuftom of the Bifhops in Ordinations ! 
The Obje&ion overlooks, by Prophecy -, which im- 
plies a Divine Defignation of Timothy to his Office. 
Bat admitting for this time their Senfe of the 
Presbytery, and the Presbyters, (though it is pretty 
evident, that Timothy was ordained by Apofties, 
or Apoftolical Men :) I fay, that by the laying on 
of the Hands of St. Paul, and the Presbytery on 
him ^ we are to underftand his Ordination to the 
Function of Bifhop h which was performed with 
fuch a Ceremony : And that in Conformity to the 
Tradition of the Jewifh Church, wherein it was 
ufed, with Prayer, when a Perfon was to be ad- 
mitted into an holy Office. Whence it is, that 
laying Hands on one, and Ordaining him, are Re- 
ciprocal Terms amongft *.he Rabbies. I will al- 
low, (though contrary to the after- Cuftoms of the 
Church, in the Confecratioti of Bifhops) that fome 
"Presbyters might lay their Hands on Timothy, at 
his Ordination, with St. Paul: But then our Ad- 
verfaries muft own, that the Apoftle a&ed there- 
in, as he that Ordained him •, and confequently, 
that without him, the Impofition of the Hands of 
the others, would have been to no purpofe. It 
was he alone that laid his Hands on him, as he 
that had the Right to inltitute him into the Epif- 
copat, and to confer on him the Office of Bifhop : 
And the Presbyters joined with him, but as Af- 
iiftants, who by that Aftion approved what he did. 


E P I s c o p a c y Afferted. J i 

The whole Virtue, and Efficacy of the Ordination 
proceeded from Sr. P##/, who alone had the Power 
to convey to Timothy the Apofrolical SuccetTion : 
Which the others could not do, by the Impolinon 
of their own Hands. As fdftiuh could not fucceed 
to Mofes^ unlefs this laid his Hands on him 5 after 
which he was invefted with the Spirit of Wrfdom 5 
and the Ifraelites obeyed him: So it was abfolute- 
ly neceffary, that Timothy fhould receive from an 
Apoftle, or an Apoftolical Man, the Right of Sue- 
ceffion, by the Impofition of his own Hands ^ 
otherwife the Christian Church would not have 
owned him for a lawful Succeflbr, /. c. a Biihop, 
The Presbyters then, in the time of the Apoftles 7 
might affift at the Ordinations • they might even 
lay their own Hands with them on the Perfons, 
*vhom they were admitting into the holy Mimicry^ 
in the Senfe I have explained, thtf probably never 
praclifed in the cafe of Bfthta&j but they could 
not do it without them : For if they had done it, 
it would have been a downright Usurpation, and 
a vain Ceremony, which would have rendeiM the 
Call of the Minifter unrighteous, and null to all 
Intents and Purpofes. T c was of indifpenfabl' 
•ceflity, that the Ordination 
who had the Right to convey the 
ceffion. And the fame'Cufto; ::ved in the 

Reformed EpifcopalCfiurc: : Ezrcpe at this 
Day-, though it is affirmed, contrary to Truth,, 
that the Proteftant Bifhops, as weli as the Popifh, 
have taken away from the Presbyters, by a mant- 
feft Violence, the Right of laying on their Hand-:. 
at the Ordinations. The Bifhops do no more 
therein, than St. Vaul did. They indeed alFume 
to themfelves the chief Power of Ordaining. $ and 
they maintain, that none without them can lay 
their Hands on any Perfon, to inftitute him into 
Holy Orders : feuc they do not deny, that others 

F 4 niay 

j2 The DivineRighto/ 

may do it with them ^ and they do not bar the 
Presbyters from enjoying their (hare in that Cere- 
mony, on certain occafions. Thefe do lay their 
Hands with them, at the Ordination of Presbyters ; 
both by way of Approbation, and by way of Af- 
fociation : Which is all they can juftly claim. So 
then the Presbyters lay their Hands with the Bi- 
fhops, when he pronounces the Words, Receive 
thou the Holy Gboft •, but not without him : And 
the chief Virtue, and Efficacy of the Ordination 
depends upon his Aftion •, who alone, having the 
Apoftolicai Succeflion in his Chara£ter, can impart 
it to others, and continue the Miniftry in the 
Church. Which is evident, in fome meafure, in the 
Cafe of Timothy. For therein St. Paul attributes 
to himfelf, to have beftowed on him the Gift he 
pofTelTed ^ by the laying on of his Hands, when 
he Ordained him. But he declares likewife, that 
it was done with the laying on of the Hands of 
the Presbytery $ viz. in Company of the Presby- 
ters, whom he had called to join with him in the 
Performance of fo foiemn a Ceremony. There can- 
not be, I think, a fairer Explication of thofe two 
feeming contrariant PafTages-, admitting our Ad- 
verfaries Senfe of the Presbytery. And in truth, 
who can imagine, that iimple Presbyters, or what 
we call the Lower Clergy, could confer on Timo- 
thy the Dignity of a Bifliop? They could not 
give to another a Degree, which they had not 
themfelves : Nihil dat, quod infe non habet. And 
if they had it^ how is it, that they did not fhew 
It ^ when thofe Officers were fcarce in the Church ; 
and none but the Apoftles, or thofe whom they had 
yaifed to the firft Stations, could communicate it ? 
Timothy could never have been invefted with fuch 
a Prerogative, Pre-eminency , and Authority * if 
St, Paul, or fome other like him, had not inter- 
vened in it. The inferior MinifterS could not place 

a Man 

Episcopacy Afferted. 73 

a Man in a fuperior Office in the Church : That 
was, in reafon, above their reach. None but 
the Impofition of the Hands of St. Paul, could 
fet Timothy in fo high a Station in the Hierar- 

It is not therefore to be doubted, after thofe 
eminent Functions, which I have afferted to Timo- 
thy, and which he actually exercifed without Con- 
tradiction^ but he enjoyed a high Dignity in the 
Church. But what I have faid, fecondly, That 
St. Paul conferr'd on him, by his Confecration of 
him to be a Bifhop, the Power of Ordaining Mi- 
nifters himfelf, by the laying on of his own Hands 
on them -, is no mean, or wrong Argument of it ; 
That being an Eflential of the Epifcopai Office, as 
I have fhewed already. I fpeak of that Ordina- 
tion, or laying on of the Hands, which gives the 
Perfon fo Ordained •, if a Bifhop, the Right of Go* 
verning his Church in Chief, and continuing the 
Evangelical Miniftry in it •, if a Presbyter, of 
Preaching the Word, and Adminiftring both the 
Sacraments, in his Congregation •, and if a Dea- 
con, the fame, with Reitriction to Baptifm, and 
in Subferviency. None but he, who has the Apo- 
ftolical Succeffion duly in him, can tranfmit it to 
others. Now they are the Bifhops only, that have 
the Title to fit in the Apoities Chair ^ and to 
whom thefe have entrufted the Keys of the King- 
dom of Heaven, as their direct Suceeffors. And 
if the lower Clergy have any (ha: . in the Ordination 
of Minifters, as I have explained it before, it is by 
way of Affbciation, Approbation, and Affiftance in 
the Solemnity : But the Effential Operation, which 
makes it Regular, and Apoftoiical, proceeds pri- 
marily from him who has the difpencing of the 
Succeffion. Wherefore we do not find in the Boojcs 
of the New Teftament, or any where in the Hifto- 
ry of the firft Ages of the Church, that ever any 


p 4 The DlVINERlGHTtff 

limple Presbyters ordained a Minifter, without a 
Bifhop. In the time of the Apoftles, it was al- 
ways they themfelves, or their Deputies, and Com- 
tniflioners, that did it : And afterwards, it was 
the Bifhops in their refpeftive Sees. Since then 
St. P<z#/ conferred upon Timothy the Right of lay- 
ing his Hands upon fuch as were to be admitted 
into Holy Orders \ and that we have no ground 
to doubt, but he exercifed it on feveral within his 
Diftrifl^ and that Prerogative belonged but to 
^hofe, who held an eminent Rank in the Church : 
We ought to conclude, that he was more than a 
Secondary Presbyter, /. e. that he was a Birtiop 5 as 
is implied in the fecond Paffage produced, Lay 
Hands fuddenly on no Man. To which I fhall an- 
nex here, as fpoken to the fame purpofe, that in 
2 Tim. ii. 2. The things that thou haft heard of me 
among many Witneffes, the fame commit thou to 
faithful Men, who fball be able to teach others 


I have faid, thirdly, That St. Vaul committed to 
•him a Jurifdi&ion over his Clergy •, grounding that 
upon the : t! ^aflage, Againft an Elder receive 
not an Accu fatten, but before two or three Wit- 
nefjes : Which is another Argument of his Epif- 
copal Dignity, and Superiority. And indeed that 
is a peculiar Prerogative, which is there given to 
Timothy, exclusively to the other Minifters, to re- 
ceive the Accufations which are brought before 
him againft the Elders : And confequentiy to in- 
flicT: upon them a condign Cenfure, if they are 
found Guilty. If he is to receive the Accufations 
fcrought before him againft the Flders-, then they 
are his Inferiors, and he has a Jurifdi&ion over 
them-, fince if they are faulty, he may proceed 
againft them Judicially : Otherwife to what pur- 
pofe has he a Power to receive thofe Accufations ? 
I know very well what is pretended^ to elude the 


Episcopacy Afferted. 75 

force of that Paflfoge, wherein the Authority of 
Timothy over his Clergy, is fo clearly laid down h 
viz. that the Apoftle gives him a Right of re- 
ceiving fuch Accufations, not to judge of them a- 
lone -, but to carry them before the Senate of the 
Presbyters, that they may be debated before the 
Body, and the whole Presbytery determine them 
with him. I muft confefs, there ought to be an 
Order obferved in thofe Proceedings 5 and the Bi~ 
(hops muft not look upon themfelves to be fo ab- 
folute, and wife, as to be difpenfed from taking 
the Advice of their Clergy. And when St. Paul 
inftru&ed Timothy, not to receive fiightly an Ac- 
cufation againft an Elder-, but before, or under 
two or three Witnefles •, I am perfuaded, neither 
the one, nor the other underftood thereby, that a 
Bifhop might a£t defpotically. I am apt to be- 
lieve, that he would have proceeded therein, as 
the other did in the Cafe of the Incejiuous Corin- 
thian. But this is ftiied torquere ^uxflionem \ for 
fuch Fafts are not denied : The Point is, Whe- 
ther the Authority Sc. Paul commits to Timothy , 
of receiving an Accufation againft an Eider, when 
it is well grounded, and well proved, does not 
give him a Jurifdi&ion over the Elders, and lets 
him in a Seat of Superiority ? Let him call, or 
not call his Clergy ^ that no way increafes, 
or diminifhes the Power he has. Now I argue, 
that it can be no otherwife conceived. For, 1. The 
Apoftle dira&s his Difcourfe to him alone-, and it 
is to him in particular, that he gives that Infl 
ftion. Why then will Men join his Clergy with 
him$ i.e. his Presbyters in their Seafe: That is 
an addition to the Text, and no way deducible 
from it ? 2. If SuPaul had meant, that the Jurif- 
<ii£lion fhould be in common betwixt Timothy, 
and his Presbyters-, he would undoubtedly have 
exprefs'd himfelf in this manner, or to this effe£L 


j6 The Divine Right of 

Againft an Elder ■, thou, and the Presbytery, receive I 
not an Accufation, hut before two or three Wit-\ 
nejfes. 3. Admitting that they were to (hare the I 
Jurifdiftion with him j in the terms that the Apo- I 
(tie delivers himfelf, he makes him ftill fuperior 
to the Body of the Presbyters ^ in that he is to re- 
ceive the Accufation, and proceed Judicially upon 
it. To him belongs the Judgment Seat. 4. He 
that is judged by another, muft be inferior to him 
In that refpe£t But the Elder is to be judged by 
Timothy^ before whom the Accufation is to be | 
brought, and examined : This is therefore fuperior 
to the other -, and he is entitled to an Office, up. 
on which the Presbytery is dependent. It will 
perhaps be replied ^ That the Elder, who is Equal 
to him in Degree, becomes his Inferior, by falling 
into a Crime. But if the Accufation is falfe, and 
he is innocent -, wherein is he inferior to him ? 
And by what Right is he fubjeQed to the Judg- 
ment of his Equal ? It is aliedged indeed, That 
Timothy was to bring the Accufation before the 
Presbytery, who were fuperior in a Body to any 
Eider : But that is gratis ditlum, upon a fhifr^ 
without any manner of Proof made of it. For 
put the cafe, that Timothy had been accufed be- 
fore his Clergy ^ would he have appeared before 
them > And would he thereupon have become their 
Inferior > Certainly the Higher cannot be judged by 
the Lower. St. Paul never intended to tell Timo- 
thy, When thy Presbyters, and thy Peacons fhall 
accufe thee, and go about to depofe thee, fub- 
mk thy felf to their Judgment. He would have 
him indeed, not receive an Accufation againft an 
Elder ', but before two or three Witneffes. But he 
never underftood, that his Clergy fhould receive 
one againft him, to proceed on it in a Judicial 
way. Suppofing therefore, that he fhould have 
?ender'd himfelf worthy of Depofition 3 there mul) 


Episcopacy Afferted. 77 

have been found out a fuperior Power, to judge 
him. They could have no Authority over him, 
as he had over them. The Cafe quite alters here. 
None but they who were above him, and from 
whom he derived his Mtniftry -, or who fhared ic 
with him, in a Body, for want of another Power, 
could proceed to Ecclefiaftical Cenfures againft 
him. Which fhews the Eminency of his Degree, 
in which none but the fuperior Clergy could touch 
him$ as being placed himfelf in one of the higheffi 
Stations in the Church, which laid the Presbyters, 
and the Deacons under his Jurifdi&ion, And it is 
very probable, that Timothy was conftituted by 
St. Paul, Metropolitan, and Archbifhop of the 
whole Province of Ephefus. 


A Particular Proof of the Apojiolical In- 
fiitntion of Epifcopacy, in the Perfon 
of St. Titus Bijhop of Crete. 

THE Cafe of St. Timothy, arid St. Titus, is To 
parallel, and is fo much grounded upon the 
like Authorities ; that having "difcours'd pretty 
largely upon the former, I might very well be diP 
penfed with from proceeding on the latter: If they 
did not mutually give Light to one another, and 
into the Matter I have in hand, the Apoftoiical In- 
ftitution of Epifcopacy *, and the Practice of it in 
the Apoftles time, and by them. 

Titus then, as well as Timothy, was a Bi(hop 5 

and that of Crete, or Candia, as it is now called -, if 

t we 

78 the Divine Righto/" 

we will give any Credit to the Writings of the 
Primitive Fathers, and the faithful Relations of the 
Ecclefiaftical Hiftorians, in the earlier, and the 
latter Ages likewife of Chriftianity. Eufebius ac- 
quaints us, a " That Titus was the firft Bifhop of 
" the Churches in Crete. "The Apoftle (St.Paul) 
" confecrated him, fays St. Ambrofe, b Bifhop of it, 
And fo Si.Cbryfoftom, c " That without doubt, Ti- 
u tus was an approved Perfon, to whom was com- 
a mitted oxU^©* v?er©', an entire Ifland ^ and 
" the Power, and Jurifdiftion over fo many Bi- 
" (hops, rocryrwv 'ETriaxoTroiv x^/crir. And likewife 
Theodoret, d u That he was by St. Paul ordained 
** Bifhop of Crete, though a very large Ifland, to 
" ordain Bifhops under him. To which may be 
added that of St. Jerom, e " That Titus was Bi- 
" fhop of Crete : And in it, and the adjacent 
" Illands, he Preached the Gofpel of Chrift. And 
alfo the Teftimonies f of Tbeophylatt, Oecumenius y 
and many others, to the fame effeO:. 

It is true, that Titus was likewife an Evange» 
lift : For though it is no where fo faid of him in 
the New Teftament, ipfijjimis ter minis, as it is of 
Timothy, 2 Tim. iv. 5;. Watch thou in all things \ 
endure AffiiUions, do the Work of an Evangelift^ 
make full proof of thy Minijiry •, yet it appears fo 
from leveral Particulars. It is plain, Gal. ii. 1. that 
he accompanied St. Paul to the Council of Jeru- 
falem $ and in his Travels through Syria, and CM- 
via, to Preach the Gofpel, and to gather Churches $ 
and that he was fent by him upon the fame ac* 
count to fome places, and fent for to others. He 
was with the Apoftle at Philippe when he writ 
his fecond Epiftle to the Corinthians : For it is ex- 

* Eufeb. Hift. Ecdef. lib. 3. c. 4. b Ambrof. Prxf. in Tic. 

* Chryfoft. Horn. 1. in Tic. 1. d Theod. Arg, in Tic. 

* Hicrom. Car. f . In Tic* 


Episcopacy Afferted. 79 

prefied in the Date of it, that it was written 
thence * and that he fent it to them by him, and 
St. Luke. And when he was at Corinth, whither 
he was deputed by him about Church- Affairs, par- 
ticularly a Contribution for the poor Saints at Jf- 
rufalem, 2 Cor. viii. 23. as his Partner, and Feiiow- 
belper concerning the Corinthians*, as he himfelf 
deckles it : He was received by them with fuita- 
hie Reverence, and Kindnefi* The Apoftle ac- 
quaints Timothy, That Titus was departed umo 
Da/matia, 2 Tim. iv. 10. Not as Demas, who had 
forfaken him, having loved this prefent World ^ 
but by his Direction, to plant the Gofpel there. 
And he orders Titus himfeif, when he fhould give 
him notice of it, to be diligent to come unto him to 
Nicopolis, Tit. iii. 12. where he had determined 
to winter. But notymhftandiftg this Office of 
Evangelift, (fuppofing he did thefe things as fuch} 
which did not in its Nature neceffarily include 
that of a Btfhep ♦, he might be ordained a Bifhop 
at large, and continue his affiftance to St. Paul\ 
and yet have a particular Diftricl appropriated to 
him, as Timothy had. And that was Crete:, as I 
have proved by the foregoing Authorities ; Of 
which Ifland he was, it feems, Metropolitan or 

Now to (hew a little more diftin£tly, that this 
was fo \ and that Turn was ordained Bifhop of 
Crete, and had a Power therje of Ordaining Mini- 
llers himfelf, and a Juxifdi£tion committed to him 
by St. Paul. I (hall mention the Tallages i chiefly 
ground this Affertion upon. And they are th«fe 
three : For this cauje left I thee in Crete, that thou 
ffwul deft Jet in order the things that are wanting^ 
and ordain Elders in every City, as I had appointed 
thee , Tit, i. 5 . Thefe things fpeak and exhort % 
and rebuke with all Authority. Let no Man- de~ 
fpife thee, Tit* ii. i>. A Man that is an Heretic k t 


8o The D i v i N e R i g h : t of 

after the firft and fecond Admonition^ rejeS^ Tit, 
iii. 10. The two firft Paflages are fo very clear, 
or have been fo fully examined, as to the Senfe 
of them, in the preceding Chapter, that I think, 
I need fay nothing concerning them in this : But 
I muft a little explain the laft, the fecond falling 
in with it. 

The Perfon Titus is here directed to proceed 
againft, the Manner in which he is to do it, and 
the Punifhment he is to inflicl: upon him $ are eve- 
ry one of them fuch a Proof, as fhew him to have 
a fuperior Jurifdi&ion in the Church, and to be 
properly a Bifhop. As to the Per/on ; it is an 
Heretick : Which being derived from al^1/^a> 5 to 
take or receive others to one's felf, lignifies one, 
according to tiefycbiui'% Definition , who chufing 
to have fome other Opinion or Do£trine, befides 
or in oppofition, or preferring it before the Truth ; 
is a Leader of a Faftion, and a Separatift from the 
Orthodox Congregation. Which being a Crime 
of a Spiritual nature, belongs properly to the Cog- 
nizance of the Ecciefiafticai Judge. As to the 
Manner in which he is to proceed againft him* 
it is after a firfl and fecond Admonition. Wherein 
it differs from the Method prefcribed by our Sa- 
viour to private Men, in the cafe of Offenders, 
Mat. xviii. 15,8V. who are there to be firft ad- 
rnonifh'd privately, and then in the prefence of 
one or two Witnefles,. before they are complained 
of to the Church. But here the Perfon fpoken to, 
being a publick Magiftrate 5 his firft Admonition 
is reputed equal to the other two 5 and his fecond 
to the third there : So that upon the Criminal's neg- 
le&ing to hear him, he may go on to Ecciefiafticai 
Cenfures againft him. As to the Punifhment, which 
he is to inflift upon an Heretick ; it is reletting of 
him y sTa^a.nv. Thus St. Pan/, 2 Cor. xul J. having 
admontlhed the Offenders amongft the Corinthians 


Episcopacy Afferted. 8 1 

the firft tlrre^ he proceeds, VerC 2. / told you be- 
fore ', hid Urttel you, as if I were prefent the fe- 
cond tip, rtd being abfent now I write to them 
which Heretofore have finned^ and to all other, that 
if I come again, I will not /pare. And Verf. 10. 
he tells them, that this fecond Admonition is, That 
I may not ufe fharpnefs, according to the power 
1 ch the Lord had given him to Edification, and 
rot to befiruftion : Which is in the Original, 

flacgscrisj taking azvay-, the Term commonly ufed 

ihe Canons for Excommunication. From all 
which it is evident, that Titus had a Jurifdi&ion 
committed to him 5 and that he was a Bifhop, pro- 
perly fo called, Well therefore might StJFWdire£l 
him, to rebuke with all Authority 3 and to advife 
him to take care, that no Man fhould defpife 

Having proceeded thus far in this matter of the 
Hierarchy -, I think, it will not be improper in this 
place, before I go farther, that I Anfwer that grand 
Objection, which is ufually made a- 
gafnft Epifcopacy, viz. That if it objetfwi, 
were by Divine, or Apoftolicai f^^ copac} 
Right} the Inltiturion of it would inU7l:ewjt 
appear in the New Teitament. You ftament. 
cannot (hew us. fay our Adverfaries, 
in any of the Writings of that Holy Book, that 
ever jefus Chrift, or his Apottles, apposed Bi- 
fhops above the other Clergy : Or that St. fames 
the Lefs, or Simeon the Son of Cleophas, were fo 
at Jerufalem^ or Timothy at Ephefus, or Titus in 

To which 1 anfwer, 1. That it solution. 
was not necefldry, that the New Te- 
ftameut fhould tell us, Word for Word, that there 
mult be a Hierarchy in the Chriftian Church. It 
was already fettled in the Jewiih : And it is enough, 
as I have intimated before, that our Lord did not 

G contradict 

82 The Divide Right of 

contradiO: it, or any way oppofe the Eftablifhment 
of it, to (hew that he approved it. If he had had 
a mind to change the Form of it, as to its Sub- 
ftance-, he would have exprefs'd himfelf plainly 
fomewhere to this effeft : Let all fuch as ferve 
at the Altar, or minifter about Holy Things, be 
look'd upon henceforward as Equal ^ there (hall 
be no more any Subordination between them, as 
has been hitherto ufed : The ancient Polity muft 
be now aboiifh'd, and a new Difcipiine introduced 
inftead of it-, that which has been hitherto obferved, 
is out of Date from this Day forward. But he ha- 
ving not done fo^ it is but natural for us to con- 
clude, that the Subordination in the Miniftry was 
acceptable to him^ and that it was his pleafure 
it (hould be continued in the Church under the 
Gofpel, as it was under the Law. For the Ec- 
Clefiattical State confifted then of an High Prielt, 
who was above all the other Prielts, and Levites : 
And though there were feveral Orders of Officers 
in each principal Synagogue-, yet was there one 
amongft them, who being in an eminent Sration, 
was called the Chief, or Matter of it, the Rabbi. 
Befides that it is fufficient, that the Gofpel fhould 
deliver to us, as it does, the general Maxims of 
the Government of the Church : Which may ad- 
mit of fome Alteration, as to the Exercife of it, 
according to the Prudence of thole that Govern £ 
provided the Form, as to its Subftance, be pre- 
fer ved entire, and a good Order be obferved ^ what 
is convenient at one time, being liable to be other- 
vife at another. I would not hereby infinuate, 
that that Form has been changed, as to the Sub- 
flance of it : I only fay, that if the Gofpel has 
not given us particular Rules about the Exercife 
of it •, it is becaufe it was not thought fit to fix 
that to a Point, which was left free to be altered y 
if the Prudence of the future Governors judged it 


Episcopacy Afferted. 82 

proper, into whofe hands the Ecclefiaftical Difci- 
pline was to be tranfmitted. For it is not with 
the Government of the Church, as with the Do- 
£trines of Faith. The Apoftles muft have declared particularly upon thefe latter ^ and have 
laid down unfhaken Principles, and which ought 
never to be altered^ becaufe they are unchange- 
able. But as to the former y it was enough, that 
they kept to what they found already in ufe in the 
Church : And that they recommended, as they did, 
I Cor, xiv.40. That all things Jhould be done decent- 
ly, and in Order ^ ra tcI'^'j, according to the Efta- 
blifh'd Order. 

2. I reply, That our Adverfaries alledge a thing, 
which is not granted, viz. That we cannot prove 
by the New Teftament, that there was inftituted 
i Diftinftion of Degrees in the Evangelical Mini- 
Itry^ and that fome were raifed above others in 
Dignity, and Power, in Quality of Bifhops. Me- 
thinks (without repeating others) one cannot read 
that celebrated PaiTage, Ephef. iv. 11, 12. which I 
had before occafion to mention 5 When rjfefw Chriji 
afcended up on high, he gave fome, Apoftles ; and 
fome-, Prophets -, and fome, Evangelijls y and fome v 
Paftors , arid Teachers -, For the per felling of the 
Saints, for the work of the Miniftry, for the edi- 
fying of the Body of Chrift. I fay, One cannot 
read that Paifage, without obferving a plain Subor- 
dination between thole Minilters •, fome appearing' 
higher than others in thofe very Stations, As for 
St. James , Simeon ', Timothy, and Titus $ I pre- 
fume, I have fully demonstrated above, that they 
were Bilhops in their refpeQive Sees. It is true^ 
3c is here pretended, that fome of thefe Men wet® 
a kind of Bifhops at large, by virtue of their Cha- 
racter of Evangelifts : And that it was upon that ac- 
count, that St. Paul fent them into remote Places, 
ihd' beyond the Seas, to ordain Minifters, where 

G 2 they 

84 The DivineRighto/ 

they were wanted, in the Churches which he 
had founded. But befides that it cannot be proved, 
that the Office of a Bifhop was included in that of 
an Evangelifts it is thereby corifefs'd, in fome mea- 
fure, that none but thofe who had the Apoftles 
Commiflion, or were fent by them, could ordain 
Minifters in the Church. For indeed if others 
might have done it-, why did they not leave ic 
to them > And why did they engage thofe their 
Deputies in troublefome Journies, and perilous 
Voyages-, if the other Paftors, who were prefent 
in thofe Churches, could admit Men into the Ser- 
vice of the Church, by the Impofition of their 
own Hands on them ? Certainly thofe Evangelifts 
had a Power, which the other Minifters had not ; 
and which could not be conferr'd on them, but 
by the Apoftles, who ordained them to it. The 
truth is, we do not find, that in thofe Days any 
but the Apoftles, the Evangelifts Commiflioned 
thereunto by them, and the Apoftles Succeffors, 
i. e. the Biffiops -, took upon them to lay their 
Hands on Men, to inftitute them into the Mini- 
fteriai Function : That Work was left to them, as 
who had the Right to perform it. And call thofe 
Deputies, or Succeffors of the Apoftles, Bijhops, 
or not *, it is fufficient to my purpofe, that they 
had a Dignity, and an Authority, which the other 
Minifters had not. But what can our Adverfaries 
return to the Inftances of Simeon h and that before- 
mentioned of Timothys Succeffor, or whoever was 
at that time Bifhop of Ephefus ; to which I might 
add thofe of Polycarp Bifhop of Smyrna, of Ami- 
fas Bifhop of Pergamos, of the Bifhop of Tbya- 
iira •, and the other three Bifhops of the Churches 
if 4//<7, who are written to by St.fobn, at the 
DireQion of JefusChrift, Rev. ii. and iii. and which 
are not liable to the Evafion of thefe Perfons be- 
ing Evangelifts ? To confine my felf at prefent to 


Episcopacy Afferted. 85 

the firft of thefe feven Afiatick Bifhops, though 
the fame thing is obfervable of them all : I per- 
ceive in him a diftin£i Character from the relt of 
his Clergy 5 and I confider him as he, who was 
appointed by the Holy Ghoft to impart to his 
Flock that important Inftruftion, which was to 
ipake their Happinefe, or Mifery. He is filled 
there an Angela upon the account of his Office, 
Merit, and the Authority he had to fpeak to his 
Church, as from God, and as his AmbaiTador: 
And therefore to him alone is that CommilTion, 
and that Inftru&ion directed. From all which ic 
is evident, that both the Inftitution, fo far as was 
neceiTary ; and the Practice of Epifcopacy, with 
the DiftincYion of Degrees in the Miniftry, ap- 
pears by the New Tejltanaent. To which I may 
annex, that Jefus Chrift is reprefented in the be- 
ginning of this fecond Chapter, and in the pre- 
ceding, as holding feven Stars in his right Hand, 
viz. thefe (even Biihops: Which cannot imply 
lefs, than his Approbation, and Protection of this 
Form of Church- Government. 

Now becaufc it may fallout, that fomereflecl- 
ingupon the Anfvver 1 have given to theQbje&ion 
again!! Epifcopacy, taken from hence, that its In- 
ftitution is no where to be found in the New Te- 
flament} no Fooifteps of it being feen in the Wri- 
tings of the Evangel; Its, or Apoltles, as the Anti- 
Epifcopal Men pretend ^ becaufe it may fo fall 
out, I fay, that fome will infer, that according to 
a part of that Anfwer, there mull be a Pope in the 
Chrittian Church : I think it will not be amifs here, 
that I take off that IUufion. If it be true, they 
will urge, that Jefus Chriit fafhioned the Evange- 
lical Miniftry, or of the New Church, upon the 
Model of the Old ^ #'. e. if he has not changed the 
Form of the Eccleiiatlical Government, except as 
p what was Typical, and Ceremonial in it 5 but 

G x has 

86 The Divine Right of 

has transmitted to his Apoftles the Idea of the Sub- 
ordination between the Minifters, without touch- 
ing that Point-, (that they, and their SucceiTors 
jnight let it run on, as that which had always 
been, and was always to be in ufe in Religion) 
there ought to be in the Chriftian Church a Sovereign 
Pontif, upon whom all may depend, in whatever 
Station they are-, and that can be no other at this 
Pay, than the Pope of Rome. It cannot be denied, 
but this follows from what I have afferred : But 
then this Sovereign Pontif, or High Prieft, is not 
the Pope, but Jefus Chrilt himfelf •, who is ftiled, 
I Pei.Yh 2$. The Shepherd, arid Bijhop of our Souls ^ 
and in feveral places of the Epiftle to the Hebrews^ 
Chap, iv, v, vii, iff c. our High Prieft. And who 
being the Head of the Church, has appointed fome 
to one Work, and others to another, in a due Sub- 
ordination, according to his manifold Wifdom; 
So that there is none but He, that can juftly pre- 
tend to the fupreme Seat in the Chriftian Church, 
And conformable to this, as the High Prieft under 
the Law was the Type of Jefus Chrilt ^ To the 
Diverfitv of Offices amongft the Minilters of the 
Jewifh Synagogue, whereof fome were fuperior to 
others ^ was the Pattern of the different Degrees, 
and of the Subordination of the Officers under the 
Gofpel, who ferve in the Chriftian Church, under 
Jefus Chrift their Head, according to their p: ; j 

C H 4 F. 

E p i s c o p a c y AffertedL 87 


An Explication of fome Pajfages of the 
New! eji anient^ and the Fathers ^which 
are perverted to Overthrow the Di- 
jlinStion of the Degrees in the Mini- 

NOtwithftanding what I have hitherto fiid, 
and proved out of the New Teflamenr, and 
the Fathers 3 I am fo fenfible of the Tenacioufnefs 
of our Adverfaries, that I doubt, they will not 
eafily quit their Hold .:. And the more, becaufe they 
think their Opinion grounded in the lame Book, 
and Writers, as well as ours. Thev pretend, that 
there are feveral PalTages in the New Teftamenr, 
(which it would be too long to repeat here) 
wherein the Terms of Bljhcp, and Presbyter, fig- 
nitie the fame Officer $ that thofe that are called 
there Bifhops, were likewife Presbyters 5 and that 
thofe that are called there Presbyters, were like- 
wife Bifhops : That there were feveral Bifhops, or 
Presbyters, in one and the fame Church-, and that 
the Apoltles themfelves, who were likewife Bi- 
fhops at large, filled themfelves Presbyters*, and 
the like. And to fhew farther, fay rhey, that there 
was an Equality between all thofe feveral Paftors; 
they look'd upon one another as Brethren : And 
conlidered themfelves as Fellow-Labourers, and 
Fellow-Soldiers. To which they add fome Quo- 
tations put of,C/emens Alexandnnus, and other Fa- 
thers ; which fpeak after the fame manner. And 
likewife the Title, which fome Bifhops of the fe* 
cond, and third Centuries, give themfelves fome- 

G 4 times, 

88 The DivineRight of 

times, of Syn> Presbyters. But I (hall endeavour 
now, by the following Reflections, to overthrow 
this Argument of theirs ^ and fhew, by a general 
Explication of thofe Pafiagts, thai they mitunder- 
itand the Senfe and Spirit of the New Tettamenr, 
and thofe Fathers-, and pervert the Apoftoiical, and 
Primitive Form of Church-GovernmeiK, to ferve 
their own Purpofes. 

To folve all thefe Difficulties, I prefume, I need 
lay down but this one Principle ^ viz. T har the 
Terms of Bi/Jwp, of Presbyter, or FJde,r\ and even 
of Deacon, both in the New Teiiamr-' 1 in 
the Writings of fome of the earlielt Fai . , may 
be fometimes ufed Appellatively, and iomet mes 
Properly. In the former Accepau on, accc ding 
to its primary Signification, the Term of bifijop 
denotes an Overfeer •, that of Presbyter^ or h/der, 
as it relates not to Age, but an Office , and has 
been transferr'd from the State to the Church, im- 
ports an Ecclefiaflical Officer with Prtfetture •, and 
that of Deacon y 2. Servant. In the latter ^ the 
Word Bijhop fignifies one, who has the chief over- 
fight of a See \ who has the Right of Ordaining 
Minifters in it^ and the Authority of exerciflng 
Jurifdi&ion over his Clergy, and the Faithful with- 
in his Diocefe, in Spiritual Matters. That oiPref- 
byter one, who has a fpecial Power of Preaching 
the Word, and Adminiftring the Sacraments, in the 
Congregation committed to his Care. And that 
of Deacon one, who betides ferving Tables in the 
Scripture- phrafe, and diftributing the Charities to 
the Poor ^ is admitted likewife into the Miniiiry, to 
Preach the Word, and Adminifter the Sacrament 
of baptijm^ m Subferviency to the Bifhop. This 
DiftirQion of Terms, and Offices, being well 
minded, will, I doubt not, eaiiiy remove the Ex- 
ceptions that are here ftarted. 


Episcopacy Afferted. 89 

And therefore, 1. It is not to be wonder'd at, 
if the Bijhops are called Presbyters, or Elders, in 
theNewTeftament} or the Presbyters BiJJwps^ in 
the Senfe of our Adverfaries : (Which I only ad- 
mit for Difputing-fake, it being pretty difficult to 
fhew it in any PaiTage of that Book) And if fome 
of the Primitive Fathers, as is alledged, have fpo- 
ken in that Stile. For taking thofe words Appel- 
lativeiy, the Bijhop, and the Presbyter might very 
well pafs for the fame thing -, and the Name be 
promifcuoufly applied to either of them in that 
Meaning. The Bijhops are called Presbyters, or 
Elders, it is confefs'd -, as having a Pr<efetfure in 
the Church, and the higheft too ordinarily -, and 
fo might the Apcfties themfelves. And who de- 
nies, that Presbyters having Cure of Souls, are 
Bijhops in the primary Acceptation of the Word - y 
and have an InfpecYion over the Flock committed 
to them? Upon which account St. Paul titles all 
the Elders of the Diflrift of Ephefus, A£ts xx. 28. 
both Bijhops, and Presbyters-, (fuppofmg there 
were any of this latter Order in that AlTembly ^ 
for Irenceus, who lived pretty near that time, tells 
us, * "That thofe Elders were called together 
Ci from Ephefus, and the other Cities-, taking 
them for the Bifhops of that Province-,) Over* 
Jeers, or Bijhops : And exhorted them, to take heel 
■unto themjelves, and to all the flock ; and to feed 
the Church oj God, which he had parch a Jed with 
his own Blood. This was their common Duty, and 
a thing EiTential to their reipeftive Functions. 
But becaufe there were ieveral Elders in the 
Church of Ephefus -, and becaufe St. Paul makes 
of thofe feveral Elders, or Presbyters, fo many Over- 
feers, or Bilhops : h does not follow from thence, 
that there was not one Paftor amorHt them, who 

* Iren. adv. Har. lib. 3. cap. 14. 


po the Divine Right of 

was above all the others $ and whofe peculiar Bu- 
finefs it was to Govern it in chief, to confer holy 
Orders, and exercife Spiritual Jurtfdiftion. The 
Holy Ghoft had appointed all the Elders of that 
Diftrift, to be Bifhops -, in as much as he would 
have them take the Overfight of the Flock, and 
feed it. But then it was as the Minilters of the 
Jewifh Church, who were JnfpeQors of the Mo- 
Jaick Service, and the Temple of Jerufalem ; and 
yet had a High -Pri.eft at their Head, who had the 
chief Care, and Government of it. So that he 
that was the Antiftes of a Chriftian See, and pre- 
sided over that Body, as its Head, and had the 
principal InfpeQion of it \ was called the B[fhop :i 
by way of Eminency : Becaufe the other bailors 
depended upon him, and a£ted but under him. 
Thefe were like the Subordinate Officers in a State, 
who adminilter Affairs under the Sovereign. Not 
that I could compare the Church to a Temporal 
Kingdom, in all refpeQs: But I prefurpe, an Ec r 
slefiaftical Government may be chalk'd out by the 
Pattern of a Civil one. 

Neither 2. ought we to be furprifed, that the 
Terms of Bifhops and Presbyter or Elder, are thus 
promifcuoully ufed^ and that the one is called by 
the Name of the other, though not according to 
our Adversaries Meaning. The very Apoftles, as 
they truly alledge, ftile themfelves Elders, or Pre/- 
byters, and even Sympresbyters, as it is in the Ori- 
ginal : So Sr. Peter, 1 Pet. v. I. The Elders which 
are among you I exhort, who am alfo an Elder, and 
a Witnefs of the Sufferings of Chrifl, and aljo a 
Partaker of the Glory that Jfhall be revealed. So 
St. John, Fpift. 2. t. The Elder under the elcl'i Lady, 
and her Children, whom I love in the Truth : And 
not I only, but ulfo all they that have known the 
Truth. And Epift. 3.1. The Elder unto the well- 
beloved Gaius, whom I love in the Truth, And 


Episcopacy AfftrtecL 9 1 

they call rhemfelves likewife Deacons, ^Joxovcj 
j Cor. iii. 5. As their Miniftry is termed 2feov?#, 
a Deacon/hip, A£ls i. 25. But then thefe feveral 
Titles are ufed Appellatively, and upon the account 
of fome common Function's. This promifcuous 
life of the Words Bifiop , Presbyter, or Deacon ^ 
does not take away the true Diftin&ion of thefe 
three Orders. It is allowed on all hands, that 
the Prtsbyterat^znti the Diaconat, are two Offices, 
formally diliinguifh'd in the VVritings of thofe 
Men, who are by every one acknowledged to 
have been Divinely- Infpired -, and even lb far di- 
itinguifrfd, that our Adverfaries will not grant the 
t)eacons to have been facred Qfficers, as the Pref-.' 
byters. And yet they are fometimes confounded 
in the New Teltament, and the Fathers, as to their 
Functions -, and might have been {0^ 
as to their Names : Thofe who were Deacons, be- 
ing likewife Presbyters 5 and thofe who were Pref- 
byters, being likewife Deacons, in fome common 
refpeft. But fuch a Confufion of Terms, and Of- 
fices, could not make of thofe two things one$ 
zior blend abfolutely the two different Degrees of 
the Presbyterat, arid the Diaconat together. Now 
that this is fo, is what may be verified by thofe 
very Men, who were firlt inftituted Deacons by 
the A polities themfelves^ whereof the greateft parr, 
if not all, were ordained Presbyters, in one Senfe- 
by the Irripofitio'n of their Hands, to exercife pare 
of that Fun&ion. At leaft among!]: thofe feven, 
it cannot well be denied of Stephen, and Philip, 
They were appointed to be Deacons, and yet they 
perform the Office of Presbyters; they are called 
Deacons, and yet they afled as Presbvters: They 
2re both Deacons, and Presbyters. Were not the 
Presbyterat, and the Diaconat, two diltintt Degrees 
in the Miniftry •, Becaufe thofe who are called 
Deacons by the Fathers, were alfo Presbyters, in 
J one 

p2 The Divine Right of 

one refpeft > That Stephen, and Philip were Dea- 
cons, appears from their Ordination, recorded 
Afts vi. wherein we are poficively told, that the 
Apoftles laid their Hands on feven Men for that 
Office ^ who are there particularly named, and a- 
mongft them thefe two firft. And that both of 
them might be called Presbyters likewife, is evident 
from hence, that they Preached the Gofpel, and 
Adminiftred the holy Sacraments, at leaft that of 
Raptifm : What none can do, but in that Quality, 
and being thereunto Authorized. For thefe are the 
two Effentiai parts of the Evangelical Priefthood ^ 
as the Reading and Expounding of the Law, and 
the Offering the Incenfe, and Sacrifices, were of 
the Legal. And none can pretend to exercife any 
Office in the Miniftry, unlets he be duly Ordained 
thereunto. Thofe very feven Perfons, who were 
firft fet apart to ferve Tables, would have com- 
mitted a kind of Sacrilege, if they had taken up- 
on them to Preach the Word, and Adminifter the 
Sacraments, without a lawful Commifiion. As for 
Stephen, he Preach'd the Gofpel fo powerfully, 
that the Jewifh Do&ors were not able to refift the 
Wifdom, and the Spirit by which he /pake, as we 
have it in AUs vi. 10. And as for Philips it does 
not only appear, that he was an efFe&ual Preacher, 
having thereby converted a great part of the City 
of Samaria (S^y?^ to the Faith ; But alfo rhar, 
betides that, he adminifter'd the Sacrament of Bap- 
tifm to the Eunuch of Candace Queen of the Ethio- 
pians ^ as it is related in that Book, Chap. viii. If 
then there were Deacons Presbyters, upon one ac- 
count ^ 3nd Presbyters might be called Deacons, 
upon another, becaufe of fome common Fun&ions - y 
arid that Confufion of Names could not prejudice 
the real Diftinftion, which lies between the diffe- 
rent Degrees of the Presbyterat, and the Diaconat: 
Why, by the fame reafori, fhould not the Presbyter 


Episcopacy Afferted. 93 

be Bifhop, and the Bifhop be ftiled Presbyter ^ and 
this Indiftinction of Words not deftroy the Diver- 
fity of Orders between them > There is much 
more ground in this latter cafe, than in the for- 
mer, for the promifcuous Life of the Terms. The 
Priefthood is the moft Eflential, and the molt in- 
trinfically honourable Office of the Evangelical Mi- 
niftry : It is in a manner the whole of the Mini- 
fter of the Gofpel, without which the reft is but 
little in comparifon, Epifcopjcy is indeed a noble 
Dignity in the Church, which clothes the Prieft- 
hood with a fine Robe: But as it relates peculiar- 
ly to the Government, and external State of the 
Body ^ it it be not grounded upon the other, it 
fignifies not much. The Glory of the Miniftry 
confifts in Preaching the Word, and Adminiftring 
the Sacraments •, which in a fpecial manner con- 
ftitutes the Priefthood, though eminently in, and 
derived from the Epifcopat. The Bifhop would 
be little more- than a bare Infpe&or, and not a 
very profitable Servant in the Houfe of God, if he 
did not perform the Duty of a Prieft •, which is the 
moft excellent Work a Man can defire upon Earth. 
The chief Glory then of the Miniftry, and its 
moft Effential part confifting in the Prieftly Office 5 
what wonder is it, if the Bifhops are called Pref- 
byters in the NewTeftament, or the Fathers ^ fince 
it is that which makes them intrinfically Minifters 
of the Gofpel, and without which their Dignity 
would be but inconfiderable ? This is the true 
Reafon, why the Bifhops, and even the Apoftles 
themfelves, are fometimes ftiled Presbyters. It is 
in refpe£t of thefe Functions chiefly, not excluding 
the Frefetfure, that they are fo named. And when 
they are termed Bifhops., it is upon the account of 
a new Dignity, that they have obtained in the 
Church $ which gives them a particular Right, 
and Authority., in order to perpetuate the Mini- 
5 Iterial 

■£if The Divide Wi g h t of 

fterial Succeflion. But we ought not. to conclude 
Illogically, that becaufe they take upon them the 
Titles of Bifhops ^ and Presbyters *, the Orders of 
the Epifcopat, and the . Presbyrerat, are not diffe- 
rent : As I have obferved of this lacter, and the 
Diaconat-, which are two diltincl; Degrees, though 
a Presbyter may be called Deacon, and vice verfa, 
as to fome common refpefr. 

3. Admitting, that in the time of the Apoftles 
there were feveral Bi (hops in one Church ^ it does 
not follow from thence, that there was not one 
3t their Head, who governed the See in chief j 
and inftituted Men into the Miniflry. I put here- 
upon this Queftion to our Adverfaries : Whether 
thofe Bifhops enjoyed an eminent Degree above" 
the fimple Presbyters, or not? If they anfwer, No^ 
and that they were not Ordained to a fuperior Au- 
thority in the Church : Then the Presbyters were 
Equal with them, and they poffeffed no more than* 
thefe. But in that cafe, I mult reply, That they 
were Bifhops but by their Infpeftion ^ i.e. that 
they were all Infpe&ors of the flock in common^ 
and appellatively : Which makes nothing againlt 
the Dignity of the proper Bifhops. If t^ey fay, 
Yea ^ and that they had received a fuperior, or a 
new Order-, 1 have what I ask : And that Bifhops 
confequently in the time of the Apoftles were 
feated in a higher Station in the Church than the 
Presbyters ^ and ail the Presbyters were not Bi- 
fhops, properly fo called. It can hardly be denied, 
I mult confefs, that the Apoftles, or thofe Com-, 
miflioned by them, Ordained feveral Bifhops for 
the Service of one principal Church : I mean not 
for all, but for thofe which were molt populous. 
And this, I humbly conceive, is fo far from In- 
validating the Unity of Epifcopacy, that it con 
tributes much to Illuftrate it. But then I affirm 3 
that they were either in the Nature of Coadjutors, 


Episcopacy Ajferted. p£ 

to fupply the Place of the proper Bifhop;, in cafe 
of Age, Infirmities, and Accidents-, or in the Con- 
gregations which ufed a different Language, or ob- 
served particular. Rites Within his Diftri£t : Or 
they were a kind of Titular Bifhops, without any 
Flocks appropriated to them, but ready at hand 
to undertake the Care of fuch as {hould be after- 
wards gathered into one Diocefe^ ptKhJafloiv mtfrr 
fyb'«v. as (hould afterwards believe, as ^.Clement 
express * it. The principal Churches were a kind 
of Colleges, as the holy Father feems to intimate 
in that place ^ whence Bifhops were taken out to 
fill up the room of the Deceafed , or were fent to 
Govern other Churches, which were newly plant- 
ed, and Wanted a Primate. For if there had been 
but one Bifhop in one chief Church, as indeed but 
one could do the Office at one time, without de- 
ftroying the Unity of Epifcopacy^ 1 fay, if there 
had been but one Bifhop there, and none of thofe 
Coadjutors, or thofe Titular Bifhops : When that 
Incumbent died, who. (hould have Confecrated on« 
for the vacant See, or the other Occafibns that 
might happen > The Lower Clergy could not, as" 
I have already fhewn : It was then neceflary, that 
there (hould be fome one, or more Bifhops in the 
Church, or nigh to it, to anfwer fuch Accidents. 
It is true, that in St. Paul's time, when Bifhops 
were fcarce, and the Harvelt grew plenteous ^ he 
fent Timothys and Titus^ with Committors to of* 
dain Elders in various Countries-, and made thera 
crofs the Seas for that purpofe. But to prevent 
fuch Inconveniencies for the future - y it is not im- 
probable, thai the Apoftles left more than one 
Bifhop in certain Churches : To the end , that 
when they, or their Neighbours (hould want any, 
they might be fpeediiy fupplied ^ and the Mini- 

^ Ckm, Epift. i. a<? Cor, Seft. 42. 


$6 The Divine Right of 

fterial Succefiion not be interrupted *, and there 
fhould be always Men in the Church, having a 
Right to admit others into its Service. This is 
the account that may be given, how there were 
feverai Bifhops in one Church, in the very time 
of the Apoftles ^ if the Matter ©f Fact be true, 
and they were not rather Diocefans under a 
Metropolitan in a Province , which is the* moll 

But, 4. Nothing feems to me worfe inferr'd, 
for the pretended Equality between all the Mini- 
tters in the Church, than the Conciufion our Ad- 
verfartes would make, that becaufe the Apoftles, 
in the New Teftament, call themfelves Presbyters, 
and like wife Fellow-Soldiers, and Fellow-Labourers 
in the Work of the Lord ^ and fome Bifhops of the 
fecond, and third Centuries, (which we do not de- 
ny) gave themfelves fometimes the Title of Sym- 
presbyters : They were therefore the fame, with- 
out Diftinftion, or Subordination. The truth is, 
if the Apoftles were not fuperior to the reft of 
the Clergy •, it mutt be ownM, that they were all 
Equal. But who can believe, that the Apoftles, 
upon whom the Chriftian Church was founded^ 
Jefus Chrift himfeif being the Head Corner-Stone ^ 
were not placed in a higher Station, than the or- 
dinary Minifters of it> Or that any of thefe in 
their time would have difputed Precedency with 
them •, and pretended, that their Authority, and 
Votes were as good as theirs ? Befides that there 
feems to me to be fome Rafhnefs, in infinuating, 
that the Deacons, as fuch ^ if they are a part in 
one refpefr, and an Order of the Clergy, as we fay 
they are ^ have an equal (hare in the Adminiftra- 
tion of the Church with the Presbyters. Doubt - 
lefs there is as much Subordination between thefe, 
with relation to their Power, as to their Office. 
But admit, that all the Paftors, of what Denomi- 

Episcopacy AJferted. 97 

nation foever they be, are Sympresbyters^ and that 
St. Peter was fo to all thofe he fpake to, as he 
fays it himfelf} and the Biihops of the fecond, 
and third Centuries were fo : Does it follow from 
thence, that they are all Equal, as to their Rights, 
Pre-eminencies, and Authorities? It is true, thac 
they have this in common between them 5 thac 
they are Presbyters, to Preach the Word, and Ad- 
minifter the Sacraments. And I likewife allow, 
that in that they are Brethren^ Fellow-Soldiers, and 
Fellow-Labourers, jointly in the Work of the Lord. 
But will any Man infer from thence, that they 
labour in the fame Rank ^ and that the one are 
not Subordinate to the others, that the Work may 
be done with Order ? It is indifputable, that the 
*Apoftlefhip had fomething Sublimer in it, than 
the ordinary Miniftry : And none can be fo filly, 
as to Equal a fimple Presbyter with St. Peter. His 
Intention was not therefore to put his Office in 
the Scales with that of the other Minifters, in 
calling himfelf an Elder, or Presbyter : In what 
Senfe, is not material here to inquire. But if asi 
an Apoftle, St. Peter pofleiTed a Dignity above the 
other Paftors •, why not as well, as being a Bifhop > 
If a Bifhop does not enjoy a higher Degree in the 
Church, than a fimple Presbyter, becaufe he is a 
Sympresbyter ^ I muft fay, by the fame Reafon, 
that St. Peter did not, becaufe he called himfelf 
fo exprefly. And by that means, in fpeaking fo, 
he will have declared, that the Apoftlefhip has 
nothing in it above the common Miniftry : Which 
is a thing dire&iy contrary to Truth, and his own 
Judgment. But what is it then that he would 
fignifie, by reckoning himfelf amongft the Elders, 
or Presbyters? Why, that the other Paftors, to 
whom God has commuted the feeding of his 
Flock, (hare with him the Office of Preach- 
ing the Word, and Adminiftring the Sacraments t, 

H and 

p8 The Divine Right of 

and that he is their Sympresbyter, and Fellow- 
worker, in Edifying the Body of Chrift. What 
an Abfurdity is it therefore, to conclude from 
thence, that the other Minifters were Equal with 
St. Peter-, and that he was not fet in a higher 
Station in the Church than they > Is it fo, that by 
that Aflbciation of the Elderfhip, and Apoftlefhip, 
all the Presbyters were Apoftles ; or that the Apo- 
flle was no more than a fimple Elder, or Mini* 
Iter ? But if the Sym-presbyterifm, as I may word 
it, of St. Peter, did not hinder him from holding 
a diftinguifrfd Degree in the Body of the Clergy : 
Why fhould it fwallow up the Epifcopal Digni- 
ty > And if that Term implies an Equality be- 
tween all the Minifters, the Apoftle was no more % 
above the fecondary Presbyter, than the Bifhopj 
and St. Peter will have thereby nulled the Glory 
of the Apoftlefhip, or made it common : What, I 
fuppofe, he never intended. 


Remarks upon fome Pajfages of St.Je- 
roiiv, which feem to be contrary to the 

THE before-cited Texts of Scripture, and Ex- 
amples given of Bifhops in the time of the 
Apoftles, prove, at leaft in general, and in the main, 
that the Inftitution of Epifcopacy, and the Diftin- 
ftion of the Degrees in the Miniftry, were in the 
very beginning of Chriftianity. But before I de- 
fcend to other Particulars, and follow ftep by ftep 


Episcopacy Averted. pp 

the three firfl: Centuries, to make the Reader di£ 
cern therein the conftant cqurfe of the Hierarchy •, 
I think it will not be amifs, that I examine fome 
Paflages of St.Jerom^ which feem to imply, that 
the Epifcopal Government was not inftituted by 
Chrift, or his Apoftles-, that in the Days of thefe 
latter, the Bifhop, and the Presbyter were the fame 
Officer, without any Diftinftion^ and that the 
Hierarchical Form was not eftablifh'd in the Church 
till long after them, and that by a kind of Necef- 
fity, lelt it fliould be torn to pieces by Schifms •, 
which would foon have overwhelmed it, if the 
Primitive, and Apoftolicai Difcipline had not been 
changed. I fhali infill a little upon the Explica- 
tion of thofe Paflages, becaufe there are few Anti- 
epifcopai Men but ailed ge them, when this Que- 
ftion comes into Debate : As if the Teftimony of 
one fingle Father, and he a latter one, were to pre- 
vail over the whole current of the reft. Befides 
that it may be faid, that St.forom has fpoken there- 
in like a Presbyter ^ who being not a Bifhop, and 
thinking he deferved to be one, as well as many 
others of his time * was grown peevifh at Epifco- 
pacy : And thereupon would Equalize the Presby- 
terat with it, as to their beginning, wherein the 
Presbyters were in fome refpects as much as the 
Bifhops. But let us come to the Paflages, in as 
few words as poffible^ to avoid Tedioufnefs, with- 
out taking off any thing from the force of them. 
St. Jerom then, in his Comment upon the Epiji/e 
to TV///*, after he had urged an Argument for it, 
as he does fome others elfewhere 5 which it is not 
neceflary to recite here, being anfwered by the 
whole Tenor of this Difcourfe •, concludes thus, 
* Idem eft ergo Presbyter, qui iy Epifcopus : & an- 
tequam Di aboil inftinEtu, ftudia in Religione fierent y 

* Hieronym. in Tit, 

H 2 & 

i oo The D i v i N e Ri g h t of 

& diceretur in Populis, Ego f urn Pauli, ego Apollo^ 
ego autem Cepbae, communi Presbyterorum confilio 
Ecclefm gubernabantur. Pojiquam vero unufquif- 
que eos quos Baptizaverat •, fuos putavit effe, non 
Cbrifti y in toto Orbe decretum eft, ut units de Pref- 
byteris eletlus fuperponeretur ceteris, ad quern om- 
nis Ecclefia cur a pertineret - y & Schifmatum femi- 
na tollere'ntur.'—Sicut ergo Presbyteri fciunt fe 
ex Ecclefut confuetudine, ei qui fibi prapofitus fue- 
rit, effe fubjeSos 5 it a Epifcopi noverint fe magis 
confuetudine, quam difpofitionis Dominica veritate 
Presbyter is effe ma) ores -, & in commune deb ere 
Ecclefum regere : Imitantes Moyfen, qui cum ba- 
berct Solus praefje Populo Jfracl, feptucginta ele- 
git, cum. quibus Populum judi caret. In his Epiftle 
to Oceans the Presbyter, he tells him, t Apud ve- 
neres udem Epifcopi atque Presbyteri fuerunt • quia 
illud nomen dignitatis eft, hoc atatis. In his Epi- 
ftle to Evagrius, he fpeaks much to the fame pur- 
pofe : To which he adds, *§>uidenimfacit except a 
OrdinationeEpifcopus, quod Presbyter non facit ? — 
Et ut fciamus Traditiones Apoftolicaf fumptas de 
veteri Teftamento ^ quod Aaron , & Filii ejus, at- 
que Levitt in Templo fuerunt ; hoc fibi Epifcopi^ 
i$ Presbyteri, atque Diaconi vendicent in Ec- 

Now to enter upon the Explication of thefe 
Pafifages : I affirm, 1. That Jerom did believe the 
Subordination in the Miniltrv, and the Superiority 
of ehe Bifhops above the Presbyters ^ as appears 
from thefe v^ry places, and fome others. For he 
lays here exprefly, " That it was an Apoftolicai 
%c Tradition, taken out of the Old Teftament, that 
u what Aaron, and his Sons, and the Levites were 
" in the Temple ^ the fame were the Bifhops, and 
" Presbyters, and Deacons in the Church. Upon 

f Epifh ad^OceaQo * Epift. ad Evagr. 


Episcopacy AJferted. i o f 

which account he exhorts Nepotianus thus, || Eflo 
fubjettus Pontifici tuo, & quaji ariimt parent em 
fufcipe : quod Aaron, & Fi/ios ejus ; hoc Epifco- 
pum, & Presbyteros ejje noverimus. Now we are 
all agreed, that there was a Subordination between 
Aaron, and his Sons, and the Levites • he being 
the High-Prieft, and their Superior -, and they of 
an Inferior Order. And again, in the forecited 
Paffage to Evagrius, having told him how at 
cc Alexandria, from Mark the Evangelift to Hcra- 
" clas and Dionyfius the Bitfiops, the Presbyters 
" always chufing one of themfelves, and placing 
cc him in a higher Degree, did call him the Bifhop : 
He fubjoyns, ^uomodo JiExercitus Imperatorem fa- 
ciat, aut Diaconi eligant de fe quern induflrium 
noverint, & Arcbidiaconum vocent. Where he owns 
ail thofe Biffiops tc to have been placed in a higher 
** Degree above the Presbyters, in the fame man- 
" ner as a General is above his Army. And in- 
deed he titles the Bifhops, Princes of the Church h 
as in the fame Comment upon Titus, Ecclefia 
Principem for mans, fpeaking of a Angular Bifhop, 
or the Presbyter there to be Ordained. What he 
extends to all the Chriftian World, in his Comment 
upon Pfa/m xlv. and that by drift's Appointment: 
Conftituit Chriftus — in omnibus finib us MundiPrin- 
cipes Ecclefnt, fcil. Epifcopos. For which he gives 
a very good Reafon, in his Dialogue againft Luci- 
fer : t Ecclefue Sal us, fays he, in fummi Sacerdoth 
dignitate pendet, cui fi non exors quadam, iff ah 
omnibus eminens detur potejias ; tot in Ecclefm ef- 
ficientur Schifmata, quot Sacerdotes. 

But, 2. I fry, that the Inftitution, and Antiquity 
of Epifcopacy, or of the Dlftin&ion of Orders: : 
proved by thofe Authorities of Jerom, w u ' 
Adverfaries chiefly urge againft it here 

U Ad Nepot. Epift. 2* f DiaI « adv - Luci 


io:t The Divine Right of 

in thofe Paflages there are fome Expreflions, which 
are a little too harfh -, and the Equality, and Iden- 
tity he puts between the Bifhop, and the Presby- 
ter, amongft the Ancients, i.e. in the Days of the 
Apofiles ^ feems to overthrow their Diftinclion : 
Yet they fhew pretty plainly the Antiquity of 
Epifcopacy, and the Subordination of the Presby- 
terial Office to the Epifcopal. " Before that, fays 
he, " by the Irrigation of the Devil, there were 
" Parties made in Religion ^ and it was faid a- 
c: mongft the People, I am of Paul, I am ofApol- 
" los, and I am of Cephas $ the Churches were 
cc governed by the common Counfel of the Pref- 
C1 byters. But after every one reckoned them his 
w own, whom he had Baptized, not Chrili's : It 
c: was decreed in all the World, that one chofen 
<c out of the Presbyters , fhould be fet over the 
cs reft, and fhould have the Care of the whole 
" Churchy that by that means the Seeds of Schifms 
" fhould be taken away. That is the Tranflation, 
and Senfe of St. Jeromes Words. Now it was in 
the time of the Apoftles, and at Corinth, that the 
People faid, I am of Paul, and! of Apollos, and I cf 
Cephas, and I of him that has baptized me, 1 Cor. 
i. 12, 13. Which caufed Contentions, and fowed a 
Schifm in that Church. It was then in thofe Days, 
that to remedy that, it was judged neceffary a- 
inongft the Apoflles, and the other Paftors of the 
Flock ; that throughout the World, where there 
were Chriltian Churches planted, there fhould be 
a Bifhop chofen in each Clergy, who fhould be 
the chief Rector, and Guardian of the Church, 
over which he was appointed. There is therefore, 
by the very Teftimony of St. Jerom, Epifcopacy 
ettablifh'd in the time of the Apoiiles •, to remedy 
the Schifm of thofe that faid, / am of Paul, and I 
of Apollo, and I of "Cephas , and I of him that has 
baptized me. Which gave occaiion to that Settle- 

Episcopacy AJferted. 103 

ment, as he fays. There is the Epoch, according to 
him, of its Antiquity, and of the Diftin&ion ot the 
Chriftian Priefthood j which I put with him within 
the Period of the Apoftles : And which h.3S always 
continu'd in the Church, without ever being brought 
under Deliberation in any Council, whether itfhould 
be altered. 

But if I muft explain particularly the PafTages 
of St. Jerom-, I do not find in them the Senfe our 
Adversaries would affix to them : And though 
there be fome Ambiguity, and Equivocation in them-, 
yet they may be true, if their Meaning be rightly 
underftood. He tells us, " That the'Bifhops, and 
a the Presbyters were the fame amongft the An- 
" cientS} becaufe the former is a Name of Dig- 
* c nity, and the latter of Age: Seeming to imply, 
they denoted one and the fame Office. Does he 
mean by that, that all the Bifhops were Presbyters, 
and all the Presbyters were Bifhops > If he did 
fo ^ he would contradict himfeif, and the Truth. 
He would have the Presbyter to be called Bifhop., 
upon the account of his Dignity, and Office 5 which 
is to watch over the Fiock : And the fame Peribn , 
who is a Bifhop for that reafon, to be likewife 
called Presbyter, becaufe he is old in Age. But 
this is not true in Fact, as to all the Paftors of the 
Church } who could not be ail called Presbyters, 
and Bifhops, in both thefe refpecls : There having 
been fome Bifhops, who were not ancient in Age 5 
and confequently could not be called Presbyters 
upon that (core, Whereof St. Paul himfeif is an 
evident proof; having been conftituted anApoftle, 
or Bifhop, (which I have fhewn in fome refpefte 
to have been the fame thing in effect) when he 
was yet very young, not being above rwenty five 
Years of Age, as it is fuppofed. Bat Timothy, 
whom he had Ordained a Bifhop, is an Inftance 
paft ail Controverfie 5 fince the Apoftle intimates 

H 4 if 

1 04 The DivineRighto/ 

k plainly, 1 Tim. ill- 12. when he gives him in 
charge, That he fhould let no Man dejpife hh Youth. 
Neither Sc. Paul then, nor Timothy, in refpeft of 
the Name, were Presbyters-, though they were Bi- 
fhops : And confequently upon the account of that 
Name, as it denotes Ancientnefs of Age, all Bi- 
fhops were not Presbyters. And by the fame Rea- 
fon, all thofe that were called Presbyters upon the 
fcore of their Age, might not be called Bifhops 
in reipecl of the Name, as it implies Watching : 
Since, though they had fome Right of Watching 
over the Flock, they were not therefore the chief 
Overfeers of ir, nor enjoyed their Dignity, and Of- 
fice. So that all that St. Jerom would fay in thofe 
Paffages, which we are now Explaining, is only 
this*, that ordinarily the Paftors of the Church bore 
thofe two Names ofBifhop, and Presbyter, by reafon 
of the different Qualities they had. They were cal- 
led Presbyters^ becaufe they were commonly Anci- 
ent, when they were inftituted into the Miniftry ; 
And they were named Bifhops, becaufe it was their 
proper part to Watch over the Flock. Which is 
the true Accounr, how thofe two Titles were con- 
founded in one and the fame Perfon 2 The fame 
Paitor was called by thofe two different Names h 
or to fpeak in the Words of St. Jerom to Oceanus 
the Presbyter, *Apud vet ere s iidem Epifcopi at que 
Presbyteri fuerunt «, quia illud nomen dignitatis eft, 
hoc ftatis. But it cannot be inferr'd from thence, 
that all the Bifhops were Presbyters, according to 
the proper Signification of the W 7 ord : Or that all 
the Paftors, who might be called Presbyters, and 
Bifhops, in that refpecl •, were the principal Pref- 
hyters, and Bifhops of their Churches in Dignity. 
For that is the Point in Queftion •, viz. Whether, 
though the Paftors might be called Presbyters, and 

* Supra Ejpid. ad Ocean, 


Episcopacy AJferted. 105 

Bifhops, by reafon of their Age, and Office too 5 
which made Sr. Jerom conclude on that account, 
t Idem ergo eft Presbyter, qui & Epifcopus h there 
was not one amongft them, who as the Head was 
ftiled the Bifhop of -the Church, and was the chief 
Governor of it ? This the Father does not deny 
in thofe Paflages. And I make no doubt, but he 
believed it^ as I hope it will appear by the Reafons 
I (hall now offer for it, befides thofe I have al- 
ready given. 

St. Jerom then is fo far from being of a contrary 
Opinion, as our Adverfaries pretend, that hefeems 
to me to confute it plainly 5 and to have provided 
the Chriftians of the following Ages with Argu- 
ments todeftroy it, when he fays there, that inter 
plures aqualiter Ecclejix cur a dividnur*^ and that 
the Bifhops, and the Presbyters debent regere Ec- 
clefiam in commune •, and that the Bifhops are 
greater than the Presbyters, magis Ecclefi<e confue- 
tudine, qudm Difpofitionii Dominica veritate. I 
muft confefs, thefe Expreffions are fomewhat harfh$ 
and ftriftly taken, not to be defended. But what 
likelihood is there, that St. Jerom would under- 
mine the good Order of the Churcn h and fpeak 
againft a Government univerfally eltablidfd at that 
time, in toto Orbe, as he exprefles it $ or againft 
the Hypothefis, which he proceeds upon in other 
places ^ as we have feen ? L quire we therefore in- 
to the Senfe, and Meaning of his Words. Ac- 
cording to the manner in which ne delivers him- 
felf, it muft be agreed, that he had no:: in his 
Mind the way after which the Church was go- 
verned apud veteres only, in the earlieft Ages of 
Chriftianity -, but thar he utters himfelf neie like- 
wife concerning wieAdminiftrati as it flood 
in his time ; Siciit Presbyien fc\ A Man 

f Supra in Ti*, ¥ It. . 


io6 The Divine Right of 

muft have but little Knowledge in Ecclefiaftica! 
Antiquity, or be very impudent to deny, that in 
the Days of St. Jerom, the Degree of Bifhop was 
diftinguifh'd from that of Presbyter ^ or that the 
chief Care of the Church did^belong to him who 
was Bifhop thereof. And yet our Author tells us, 
that then, vis. towards the end of the fourth Cen- 
tury, Ecclefi<e cur a inter p lures xqualiter dividitur ^ 
and that the Bifhops, and Presbyters detent regere 
Ecclejiam in commune. What appearnce is there, 
that he would lay down a Fa£t, which was noto- 
rioufly falfe •, viz. the Equality of the Pallors, and 
of their Degree, and Care in the Church : Since 
the chief Government of it was appropriated to 
the Bifhops ? Would he not have render'd himfelf 
ridiculous to the Clergy, and the World, if he had 
thereby pretended, that the Government of the 
Church ought to be changed, which had been fet- 
tled in it for fome Ages : And if he had under- 
ftood by thofe Words, that the Bifhop had no 
more Authority there, than the meaneft Minifter? 
We muft therefore find out a more Reafonable 
Meaning, more Confiftent with, and more Worthy 
St. Jerom^ in thofe Expreflions of JEqualiter, and 
in Commune : Since he fpake conformably to the 
Ufage of his Time, wherein an Equality in the 
Miniftry, and in the Difcipline was not imparted 
to each Paftor-, but the principal Government and 
Care of the Flock belonged to him, who had been 
appointed Bifhop above the reft of the Clergy. He 
would fay then, that although the Bifhops be above 
the other Minifters of the Church by their Dignity 5 
yet they ought not to prefume fo far upon their 
Authority, as to exclude the Body of the inferior 
Clergy from their Care of the Flock, in which they 
have their fhare, according to the Station wherein 
God has placed them : That though they are the 
Governors , yet Jefus Chrift has afljgned them 


Episcopacy Averted. 1 6j 

Counfellors, whofe Advice they ought to take-, 
and therefore to confer with them, as with Men 
who may give them Light in the Management of 
Church-Affairs, that they be not done inconfide- 
rately, or arbitrarily ^ and that they, and their 
Clergy, compofe a kind of Senate, for the build- 
ing up of the Body of Chrift. And moreover, 
that they are all jointly, and feparately concerned 
in the Work of the Miniftry ^ in Preaching the 
Word, Adminiftring the Sacraments, and Watch- 
ing over the Flock. This feems to me to be the 
true Senfe of thofe WIor&sJEqualiter, and in Com- 
mune. But Sx.Jercm would not have us, and we 
ought not to conclude thence^ that all the Pallors, 
or all thofe that make up the Body of the Clergy, 
are Equal ^ and that there is no Diftin£tion to be 
put between them. What he means by Ecclejia 
confuetudo, & Dominica d'iffofit'wnis Veritas $ is 
not fo eafily underftood : But if it implies, that 
Epifcopacy is not of Divine Iniiitution ; that is 
Explained, and Anfwer'd throughout this Traft. 

To illultrate this matter by one, or two Exam- 
ples in this Church of England: It would be a 
wrong Conclulion, that becaufe the Clergy of the 
Province of Canterbury, afiembled in Convocation, 
do confulr, and deliberate together, in JEquaUtcr, 
and in Commune, as St. Jerom fpeaks, about the Af- 
fairs of the Church -, all the Members were Equal 
with the Archbifhop, who prefides there : Or that 
the Presbyters in the lower Houfe, had the fame 
Authority with the Biihops in the upper, particu- 
larly in things of Judicature, or fuch as imme- 
diately concern the Government of the Church, 
and the Execution or theEcclefialtical Laws. The 
fame is to be faid of the Diocefe of London, or 
Winchejier -, wherein the Bifhop, and his Presbv- 
ters do regere Ecclefiam in Commune ; & Ecclcjlje 
cur a inter flares aqualiter dividitur. Becaufe he 
4 confers 

*o8 T&e Divine Right of 

confers with them about the Government, and 
well-ordering of his Flock 5 and they work with 
him in directing it •, in Preaching the Word, and 
Adminiftring the Sacraments : It does not follow 
from rtienc£ 4 that he is not their Head 5 or that 
they have an Equal Power with him in all things, 
excepta Ordinatione. He has his Ecclefialtical 
Courts } his Chancellor, Archdeacons, CommifTa- 
ries, Surrogates, and other Officers, for the Exer- 
cife of his Jurifdiftion. They indeed (hare with 
him the Care of the Congregations, which are 
committed to them : And fome of them are called 
Retfors, others Vicars $ and generally aiL Curates, 
upon that account ^ becaufe Ecclefm cur a ipfis corn- 
petit^ <eque ac Epifcopo : They even bear a part in the 
Spiritual Adminiftration, being empowered to fuf- 
pend Men from the Communion : Executing the 
Bifhop's Cenfures, and Mandates, which are fent 
to them. But it cannot be denied, that he is 
raifed above them in Dignity, and Authority. 
Whence it is evident, that by the Eftablifhment 
of this Church, though the Government, and Care 
of the Flock belongs to all the Paltors, in their 
refpe&ive Capacities ^ yet each Diocefe, in this 
part of the Kingdom, has a Bifhop, who excels 
his Clergy in Office, Pre-eminency, and Power. A 
plain Proof, that the Diftribution of Cares amongft 
the Minifters, does not make them all Equal} nor 
deftroys the Superiority of the Bifhop above the 
Presbyters. Which mult be very well known to 
the Latin Church in St. Jerorris time, fince it en- 
Joyed the fame Government, as to its Effentials, 
with ours ^ the Ecclefialtical State confilting then 
of Bifhops, Presbyters, and Deacons ^ between 
whom there was a noted Subordination. And he 
would have paffed for a Fool, and a Lyar •, if by 
thofe words JEqualiter, and in Commune, he had 
meant, that in thofe Days all the Paftors were 

Equal i 

Episcopacy Averted. 10^ 

Equal * and that the Bifhops were not diftingutfh'd 
from the other Minifters. But fiuce fuch a Senfe 
would be notorioufly Falfe, and Scandalous ; we 
mutt fay, that he intended only, that the Care, 
and Direction of the Church belonged to the Pref- 
by ters, as well as to the Bifhops. Every one is to 
aft in his Bufinefs, according to his Poft, and the 
Station wherein God has placed him, working joint- 
ly, and feverally for the Perfecting of the Saints, 
and the Edifying of the Body of Chrift. 

But befides that the Paflages we have been Exa- 
mining, are capable of a favourable Conftruftion, 
we muft confider a little what he fays to fovinian: 
* D/V/x, replies he to himfelf in the Perfon of Jo- 
viriian, fuper Petrum fundatur Ecclefia ^ licet id ip- 
fum in alio loco fuper omnes Apofiolos fiat ^ & 
cunfti clavfc regni Qailorum accipiant^ & ex aequo 
fuper eos Ecclefia fortitudo folidetur : tamen prop- 
terea inter duodecim unm eligitur, tit Qapite con- 
ftituto, Schifmatk tollatur cccafio. This Paflage ex- 
plains clearly the Father's Mind ^ and is the true 
Commentary, which fets in the Light the Senfe of 
thofe before alledged. He lays down therein, 
" That all the Apoftles have received the Keys of 
" the Kingdom of Heaven ^ that the Church is 
" founded on each of them, and that its Strength 
" is confolidated, and confirmed upon all of them 
" equally. There is an Equality lodged in the 
College of the Apoftles j Inter eos Ecclefia euro, 
aquahter dividitur •, i. e. the Apoftles (hare equal- 
ly the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven, and the 
Foundation of the Chriftian Church ^ and fupport 
it in common : Regunt in commune •, that is the Of- 
fice of their Apoltlefhip. ■ Notwithftanding this 
Community, or Equality of Office, he would have 
one amongft the twelve to' be chofen •, w That a 

* Hkron. Lib, i. adv. Joy. 

" Head 

no The Divine Right of 

" Head being eftablifh'd, the occafion of Schifm 
" may be taken away. There is then, in the Judg- 
ment of St. Jerom^ a Chief fet to the Apoftles s a 
Prefident of the facred Senate, a Bifhop of the 
firft Chriftian Clergy $ and one of the Apoftles 
chofen, and eftablifh'd in Dignity above the others. 
But the Reafon he gives to juftifie that Pre- 
eminency, and the Diftinftion of one amongft the 
Apoftles, is very confiderable : It was, fays he, Ut 
Capite conflituto, &c. The Meaning of this is, that 
the ground of fuch a Government was, that good 
Order might be kept, and Unity maintained in the 
Chriftian Church. For if they had not chofen a 
Head amongft them, Schifm would foon have got* 
ten in : And as Humane Nature is prone to ufurp 
Dominion, every one would have appropriated to 
himfelf the Church of Chrift, and Lorded it over 
it : Which would have caufed a terrible Divifion, 
and Confufion therein. To prevent therefore fuch 
a Scandal, which would have fprouted out from 
the very time of the Apoftles ^ they judged it ne- 
ceffary, to eftablifh a Chief amongft them ^ look- 
ing upon that Form of Government to be the beft, 
not only as to its Original Inftitution, but to ob- 
viate a Spirit of Schifm, and Contention, from cor- 
rupting the Church. Is not this then to fay, that 
there was in thofe Days a Subordination, and a 
Degree of Pre-eminency between the Paftors ^ a- 
mongft whom there was one, who was diftin- 
guifh'd from the others by the Title of hea d, or 
Chief? And that for the molt important Reafon 
that could be-, viz. left the Church fhould be torn 
to pieces by Schifms ; which would infallibly have 
feized upon the Members, if fuch a Government 
had not been fettled in the Body ? There was 
therefore fuch a Diftin&ion made then, that the 
Chriftian Church might not fall into Ruin : And 
the Apoftles tbemfeives laid the Foundation of the 


Episcopacy Ajferted. 1 1 1 

Epifcopai Government, by conftituting a Head a- 
mongft them, to keep up the Peace, and the Uni- 
ty of the Spirit. By which we fee, that though 
the Care of the Church belongs in common to all 
the Minifters * yet that does not hinder, but there 
may be a Subordination between them •, and one 
may be raifed in Dignity above the reft : And that 
that Order is as ancient as the Apoftles, who thus 
obferved it from the beginning, to prevent the 
Evils which a Government of Parity would have 
caufed in the Church ^ and to teach their Succef. 
fors how they ought to behave themfelves, and to 
maintain a good Order in the Government of the 
Body of Chrift. 

If St. Jerom^ out of a Defign to bring down 
the Deacons, whom he makes but Minifters of 
Tables^ and Widows^ in the fore-cited Epiftle to 
Evagrius^ has herein overfhot the Mark, as our 
Adverfaries will fcarce deny, by fetting up a Head 
amongft the Apoftles, and confequently a kind of 
a Pope in the Chriftian Church : Let them juftifie 
him, who think the Diaconat to be no facred Of- 
fice, and urge his Authority for the Parity of all 
the Pallors \ it is none of my Bufinefs. 

The truth is, this Diftinclion of Offices in the 
Miniftry, and the Superiority of the Bifhops above 
the Presbyters, has been all along in ufe in the 
Chriftian Church. And to carry up the Point to 
the time of the Apoftles •, though the Care of the 
Church was diftributed amongft many, it was ne- 
ceflary, for Order's fake, that between the feveral 
Minifters, there fhould be Superiors, and Inferiors ^ 
and that in each Diftrift there fhould be one, who 
fhould appear as the Head of the Body, and fhould 
be the principal Director of it. This thing is fo 
fenfible, that it is plain from the feveral Evidences 
I have already produced, and the more particular 
Proof I fhall make of it ^ that the Epifcopai Go- 

113 The D I V I N E R I G H T 0/ 

vernment was formally eftablifh'd in the very Days 
of the Apoftles, and thence immediately continued 
down through the three firft Centuries. For tho* 
there were divers Minifters in one Church -, as, ex. 
gr. at Antiocb, Epbefus, Corinth, &c. yet we are in- 
formed from Scripture, and Ecclefiaftical Hiftory, 
that there was one appointed amongft the Clergy 
to be at their Head, as their Leader. Againft that 
Man therefore did the Heathens chiefly direct their 
Spite, to make him fuffer Martyrdom. Which 
caufed feveral, out of Humility, or a Senfe of their 
Weaknefs, to hide themfelves, and to decline the 
fit it Dignity in the Church -, or to weep bitterly 
at their accepting of it, when they could not get 
themfelves excufed. In this Station (tood St.Gfc- 
mens, St. Ignatius, St. Poly carp , &c. They had 
indeed feveral Minifters with them, in their re- 
fpeftive Churches: But they had been fettled Bi- 
fhops there by the Apoftles ^ and were the Pre- 
fidents, and Chiefs in them. 

And ro give a Scripture Example of this Truth, 
within the unqueltioned Period of the Apoftles ; in 
the Church of Epbefus, whereof I have already 
taken fome notice, from Alls xx. in the Days of 
St. Paul, there were divers Paftors, whom he calls 
Elders, and even Bijhops^ upon the account of their 
Office of being Overfeers over tbe PlocL But yet 
we iee, that in that facred Body there was one, 
whom Si. John confidered above the reft, and 
whom he directs his Difcourfe ro in his Let- 
ter, filling him the Angel of tbe Church of Epbe- 
fus, Rev. ii. 1. It was doubtlefs he, who was at 
the Head of the Clergy in that Diftrift $ and had 
been ordained their Biihop, or Archbifhop, to pre- 
fide over them, and to exerciie a greater Authority- 
over that Church, than the others had a Right to : 
Though they all had the Care of it, according to 
their different Stations. Can we imagine, that 
Evodius at Ant loch) Linus at Korne^ Poly crates at 


Episcopacy JJferted. i i 3 

Epbefus i Bucolas at Smyrna^ Dionyfius at Corinth^ 
Pub fins at Athens, Am an us at Alexandria^ Philip pus 
in Crete \ and Irentus at Lyons ^ were not Iook'd up* 
on as in a higher Degree, than their Fellow-workers 
in the Gofpel > And it is not to be conceived, as 
is maliciouily fuggefted, that all thofe holy Men 
fhould fet themfelves in their feveral Times, and 
Places, at the Head of the Clergy, and the Church -j 
and that by a Spirit of Ambition, and Innovation * 
Efpecially when there was nothing to be got by it 
but Trouble, and perhaps Martyrdom. They muft 
have believed the thing good, and evea neceiTary g 
and have feen that Order already eftablifh'd in the 
Perfon of their PredecelTors in the Faith. What 
appearance is there, that all thofe Difciples, and 
SucceiTors of the Apoftles, who had tafted of their 
Doclrine, and Difcipline at the very fpring«, fhould 
unanimoufly confpire together to change a Govern- 
ment, which they, whom they immediately fuc- 
ceeded, had fettled in the Church ? Woirtd there 
not have been fome Oppofition made to them up- 
on fo material a Point : And would not fome of 
the other Minifters have faid, Why againlt the 
Precept, and Cuftom of the Apoftles, which put 
no fuch Subordination, or DiftincHon between the 
PaftorS} do you endeavour to introduce the con- 
trary, by impofing one in each «Churcfr, to be 
the Chief, and Superior? Certainly fuch a change 
could not but be very fenfible in the Chriftian 
Church, efpecially at its frrft fprouting up •, and 
muft have occafioned a great deal of Noife, and' 
many Difbrders amongft the Clergy. Befides that 
after lb much Contention, the Truth would have 
overcome: And God would not have differed, that 
his Church fhould wade through fo many Ages, 
under a Government, which W3S contrary to that 
eftablififd in the beginning. But the Practice of 
v'ie firlt Difcipies of the Apoltles, who : appeared 

1 1 4 The D i v i n 5 Ri o h i of 

at the Head of their Clergy •, (hews plainly enough, 
what they had been taught by their Matters upon 
that Point. And I think, with Submiffion, that 
what I have now urged upon this matter, amounts 
to an Argument-, that there has been a Subordina- 
tion in the Miniftry from the Apoftolical Times, 
viz. that there has been a Degree diltinguifh'd 
from the others in the Church, and a Dignity 
lying above them, i. e. the Epifcopal. As for 
St. Jerom, I may venture to fay, he never was of 
another Opinion, for any thing that appears to 
the contrary. 

I do not mean by this, that Epifcopacy in the 

Days of the Apoftles had attained its full Form. 

Things were then but in their Birth, and their 

tender Infancy ^ there was need of Time to lick 

them out, and to bring them to their Perfection. 

It would be ridiculous to expect, that the Eccle- 

fiaftical Difcipline fhould be carry'd up to the 

pitch we now fee it at, at a feafon when there 

could fcarce be any eltabliflrd. It is enough, that 

the Foundations of it were laid, and the Seeds 

fown, and the Principles delivered 5 which were 

to arrive at their Maturity, and appear in their 

Splendor, at the Meridian of the Church. The 

Family of Jefus Chrift was yet but fmall, a few 

Minifters were* fufficient for it : But ir has been 

found neceffary, in procefs of Time, to increafe 

their Number, and to invert them with a larger 

Authority to govern it* as it has extended it felf 

fir and wide in the World. In proportion as that 

People, which was in its Origine but a Houfe, is 

waxen a. great Kingdom ^ k has been requifite to 

raife its Officers, and to fet out their Charge. 

Which is the reafon, why that Order, which was 

at firft but in Embryo, as it were, has appeared 

afterwards in a very different, and more Manly 

Scute. The Foundation then of the Epifcopal Go- 

i vsrnmentf' 

Episcopacy Afferted. n$ 

trernment was laid by the Apoftles, in the Choice 
they made (according to the Opinion of St. Jerom 
himfelf) of a Chief, whom they gave a diitin- 
guifh'd Pre-eminency to amongft the other Pa- 
llors $ in the Church, I prefume, which was com- 
mitted to his Care : Which is what f contend for, 
And what is fufficient to ground that Government. 
upon, and to carry up the Dace thereof to their 
Time : Since they fettled it by their Praftice, as 
an effeftual Order to deftroy Schifm, and xo pre* 
ferve the Unity of the Spirit ^ which could not 
be done, without a Subordination in the Miniilry^ 
and ccnfering an eminent Authority to one Pa- 
ftor beyond the reft of his Clergy in his Diffrift, 
to be the Head of it. Though 1 allow, that Fpif- 
pacy had not in the Infancy of Chrittianity, all 
the Form, and all the Extent, which it has ac- 
quired in Irs Manhood. The difference of theie 
two States made the thing in a manner impof- 
fible^ the Figure of the Body augmenting, and 
diminifhing, according to the Time. The Family 

- of Jacob was far other wife Governed by Mofes 
in the Wildernefs 5 and by David, and Solomon, in 
the Land of Canaan, than whilft it continued at 
home with its Father, before their going down all 
into Egypt. The more the Church-has multiplied, 
the more has it been neceffary to multiply its 

, Leaders, and to diverfify their Imployments: As 
is done in great Houfes, where the Officers are 
more numerous, and a ftrifter Subordination is ob- 
ferved, than in fmall % though the Government be 
the fame, exercifed under one Head, upon whom 
all depends. For th6ie (Economies differ only as 
to more, or fewer Perfons, and in the fmall, the 
Head is fufficient to govern • whereas in the great. 
there mult be divers Giaffles of Officers, invtftect 
with Authority, to direQ: their Inferior^ and keep 
erery ere to his proper Bufinefs. This Example 

I 2 fhews^ 

1 1 6 The Divine Right of 

fhews us, in fome meafure, how the Church of 
Chrift, which was but a (canty Family in the time 
of the ApofUes, might be contented with fome 
Primacy in the Paftors, who were moft capable 
to govern^ and who, as the Heads, were to main- 
tain a good Order in it-, until getting Strength, 
and growing up- by degrees, that facred Body re- 
quired to be ruled by a greater, and Wronger 
Power. So that the more the Sea.fon of the 
Spring, and Harveft, made the Field of the Church 
fruitful 5 the more the Seeds, and Principles of 
theEpifcopal Primacy, and Authority, which were 
at firft but weak, and as it were in the Bud, 
broke forth, and acquired Vigour, and Splendor. 
Such was, in my Opinion, the rile, and progrefs 
of the Epifcopal Government-, and of the Diftin- 
£tion between the Bifhop, and the Presbyters : 
Which was here to be Explainedi 

C H A P. XII. 

The Tejii monies of the Apojiolical Fathers 
concerning the Hierarchy. 

IHave intimated in the firft Chapter of this 
Treatife, that the Hiltory of the firft Ages of 
Chriftianity, which is no where to be found, but 
in the Writings of the ancient Fathers of the 
Church •, gives us much Light into the true Apo- 
Itolical Difcipline. For it is certain, that as they 
lived nigh the Spring, they might better judge, 
than we at this diltance, how pure the Waters 
were that flowed thence ; And which cannot hue 


Episcopacy Averted. 1 1 7 

have contracted a great deal of Mud and Filth, 
by parting through the Dregs of the Times. We 
mull lay a great Weight upon their Teftimonies •, 
and prefer what they tell us to have feen, or heard 
concerning the Affairs of the Church, to what we 
think of them under our Prejudices. For befides 
that they were Contemporary to the things they 
relate, living in the very Days of the Apoftles, or 
foon after 5 they were Men of an extraordinary 
Piety, and Probity : And fo noc to be fufpecled of 
any Prevarication. Lee us confider then what they 
have laid of their PredeceiTors, and their Difci- 
pline : And let us examine, whether Epifcopacy 
was a Government unknown to them 5 and whe- 
ther they did not look upon the three facred Of- 
fices in the Miniftry of the Church, as three di- 
iiinct Degrees ? For it is evident, that if they have 
fpoken of them, or mentioned them as fuch^' they 
were inufeamonglt them 5 and they received thern 
from their Forefathers. 

But this being an Argument I (hall have occafion 
to purfue, through the feveral Centuries I am to 
write of: For better Method's fake, I fhali confine 
my felf here to thofe Apoftolical Fathers of the 
Firft, whereof we have any genuine Writings now 
extant. And indeed their Teftimony deferves a 
particular Confederation : For befides the Advan- 
tages they have in common with other Primi- 
tive Fathers, in point of Credibility $ they were 
not only inftructed by the Apoftles, but were en- 
dued with a large Portion of the Holy Spirit •, and 
their Writings were approved by the Church, which 
at that time enjoyed extraordinary Gifts, for the 
difcerning of Prophecies. 

To begin then by Si. Clement, of whom St.fyul 
gives this noble Character, Philip, iv. 3. That bis 
Name was written in the Book of Life ; calling 
him his Fellow Labourer in the Gofpel : We meec 

I 3 with 

1 18 The Divine Right of 

with feveral Pafiages to our p-refent purpofe in 
his firft Epiftle to the Corinthians^ which was ufed 
to be read publickly with the Scripture in the Con- 
gregation, as if it had been Canonical. But thefe, 
and the other Quotations out of the Writings of 
the Apoftollcal Fathers ^ I (hall deliver, with a lit- 
tle Variation, from the excellent Tranflation of a 
Learned DoCtor * of our own Church : It being 
out of my reach to mend it. St. Clement then, in 
that Epiftle, Sect. 42. has thefe Words \ which 
fhew the Inltitution of trie Hierarchy in the Chri- 
ftran Church to be Divine r and Apoftoiical, and 
grounded upon a Divine CommilTion : " The Apo- 
c * flies have Preached to us from our Lord Jefus, 
cc Jefus Chrift from God. Chrift therefore was fent 
" by God, the Apoftles by Chrift : So both their 
€C Offices were orderly fulfilled by God. For ha- 
cc ving received their Command, and being fully af- 
l ' : fured by theRefurrection of our Lord Jefus Chrift; 
cc and convinced by the Word of God, and the 
€C Evidence of the Holy Spirit •, they went abroad, 
" publifbing, That the Kingdom of God was at 
" hand. And thus Preaching through Countries, 
^ and Cities •, and proving by the Spirit, the Firft- 
65 fruits of their Converfions, they appointed out 
" of them Bifhops, and Deacons, over fuch as 
" (hould afterwards believe. And in the next 
Section, fetting forth, how this was done after the 
Example of Mofes in the Jewifh Church \ he applies 
It thus in the following, (Seel. 44.) where he ex- 
tends it to the Succeiiion in the Chriftian Miniftry : 
M So like wife our Apoftles knew by our Lord Je- 
" fus Chrift, that there fJiould Contentions arife 
" upon the account of the Epifcopat. And there- 
cc fore having a perfecl: Foreknowledge of this, 
" they appointed Perfons, as we have before faid h 

Di.W t .l;e now Bifjiop of 


Episcopacy AJferted* i ip 

and then gave Direction, how, when they fhould 
c; die, other chofen and approved Men fhould fuc- 

cc cetd in their Miniftry. Bleffed are thofe 

" Presbyters, who having finifhed their Courfe be- 
" fore rhefe times, have obtained a fruitful and 
" perfect DifToluiion : For they have no- fear, left 
w any one fhould turn them out of the place in 
" which they are now eftablifh'd ■• To which I 
may add, Sect i. c; You walked according to the 
" Laws of God 5 being fubje8: to thofe who had 
" the Rule over you, and giving the Honour that 
" was Acting, to fuch as were the Presbyters 
cc among you. Sell. 21. w Let us Honour thofe 
w who are fet over us ; let us refpect the Pref- 
" byters that are amonglt us^ and let us inftruO: 
cc the younger Men in the Discipline and Fear of 
cc the Lord." And ro conclude with htm, Sell 57, 
cc Do you therefore, who laid the firft Foundation 
cc of this Sedition, fubrrftt your felves to your Pref 
" byters:, and be inftruQed unto Repentance. In 
which Pailages, it is- pretty plain, that by Presby- 
ters he means Bifhops. 

I proceed next to St. Poly carp, (to conform my 
felt to the Order, in which the Learned have 
placed the Apoftolical Writings-, though he be not 
the next in time) The Angel of the Church in Smyr- 
na, as St. John ftlles him, Rev. ii. 8. whofe Epittle 
to the Philippians, which was likewife ufed to be 
read publickly as the former, affords us feveral 
material Pafiages, very Particular upon this Point. 
It is worth our Obfervation, that the very Infcrip- 
tion of it bears, that it comes from him, and the 
Presbyters that were with him. But Set!. 5. de- 
fending to give Inftru&ions to the Minifters of 
the Church, he fbeaks thus concerning the Dea- 
cons : " Alfo the Deacons muft be Blamelefs be- 
tc fore God, [or his Righteoufnefs] as the Mini- 
" iters of God in Chrift, and not of Men, Not 

1 4 faife 

i 2o The DivineRight of 

H falfe Accufers -, not Double- Tcngued ; not Lo~ 
Cc vers of Money : But Moderate in all things, 
: Companionate, Careful-, walking according to 
• c the Truth of the Lord, who was the Servant of 
c all. And he commands the younger Men, " to 
cc be fubjecl: to the Presbyters, and Deacons, as 
c unto God, and Chrift. And Se8. 6. concerning 
the Presbyters* fc ' And let the Elders [or Presbyters] 
fays he, " be Companionate, and MerciM towards 
■ all ^ turning them from their Errors ^ feeking 
cc out thofe that are Weak ^ not forgetting the 
cc Widows, the Fatherlefs, and the Poor : But al- 
c ways providing what is good, both in the fight 
C€ of God and Man, Rom. xii. 17. Abstaining from 
€c all Wrath, RefpeQ: of Perfons, and Unrighteous 
" Judgment. And efpecially being free from all 
cc Covetoufnefs. Not eafie to believe any thing 
<c againft any •, not fevere in Judgment. A pretty 
plain Defcription of a Scripture-Presbyter, or Bi- 
ihop. But Seff. n. he names particularly Valens, as 
having been a Presbyter in the Church of Philippic 
" I am greatly affli£ted, fays he, for Valen^ who 
" was once a Presbyter among you -, thathefhould 
" fo little underiiand the Place that was given to 
cc him in the Church. I (hall (hut up this with 
a Teftimcny of the Church of Smyrna, in their 
Epiftle concerning the Martyrdom of St. Polycarp^ 
Sell. 16. "He was, fays it, in our Times, a truly 
ct Apoitolical, and Prophetical Teacher-, and Bi- 
" (hop cf the Catholick Church which is at 
cc Smyrna. 

It is'fcarce confident, I mull confefs, with the 
intended Shonnefs cf this Tra£t, to repeat here all 
the PaiTages we meet with in the Infcriptions of 
Ignatius^ Epiftles concerning this matter'-, or to, 
rehearfe all the particular Names of the Bifhops., 
Presbyters, and Deacons, therein mentioned. But 
hs having been in his Generation, as he calls him- 
^ ■' - feif 3 

Episcopacy Ajferted. 121 

felf, Tbeophcrus,ov\z who carry 5 d God in his Breaft j 
and having this Chara&er given him in the Rela- 
tion of his Martyrdom, Seff. 1. Ci That he was a 
" Man in all things like unto the Apoltles. And 
moreover, thofe Pieces having pafs'd the Appro- 
bation of the Church in thofe Times y and being 
the fulled upon this Point, that the Divine Pro- 
vidence has preferved for our Information : Some 
compendious way muft be found out, to lay before 
the Reader what they contain of this matter. But 
I can think of none better, than by reducing it un- 
der feveral Heads * as it is already done to my 
hands by the accurate Pen of Dr. Hammond \ : Ad- 
ding the refpeQive PalTages to them. 

The State of this Matter then lies thus, accord- 
ing to Ignatius. 1. That a lingular or one Biihop, 
the Presbytery or Senate of Presbyters, and the 
Deacons , were or made three diltincl: Degrees or 
Orders in the Church. For in his Epiltle ro the 
Ephefians^ Seft. i. having made an honourable 
mention of Gnefimus their Bifhop, he congratulates 
them, "That God had granted them to enjoy 
" fuch an excellent Bifhop. Seft. 2. fpeaking of 
Burrbus their Deacon, in things pertaining to God-^ 
" I intreat you, fays he, that he may tarry longer, 
" both for yours, and your Bifhop's Honour. And 
in the fame place he exhorts them all, "That 
" being fubjeft to their Bifhop, and his Presby- 
" tery, they be wholly and throughly fanftihed. 
Seff. 4. "It will become you, fays he, ro run to- 
" gether according to the Will of your Bifhop, as 
•' alfo you do. For your famous Presbytery, wor- 
" thy of God, is fitted as exactly to its Bifhop, 
" as the Strings are to their Harp. Seft. 5. having 
laid down, " That whoever is not within the Al- 
" tar, he is deprived of the Bread of God : Who 

Hamm. de Epif. Jur. Dili. 2. Cap. 26. 


127 The Divine Right of 

that is, he prefently explains, viz. he that does 
not pray with the Bifhop, and the Church: Where- 
upon he concludes, " Let us take heed therefore, 
cc that we do not fet our felves againft the Bifhop, 
w that we may be the Servants of God. Sett. 6. 
" The more any one fees his Bifhop filenr, the 
" more let him Reverence him. For whomfoever 
cc the Matter of the Houfe fends unto his own 
" Houfhold, we ought in like manner to receive 
c ' him, as we would do him that fent him. It is 
w therefore evident, fays he, that we ought to look 
" upon the Bifhop, even as we would do upon 
" the Lord Jefus. SeS. 20. he 'admonifhes them 
again, " That they fhould obey their Bifhop, and 
? the Presbytery, with an entire Affection. 

In his Epiftle to the Magncfians . Seel. 2, he 
beginneth the thing thus : " Seeing I have been 
a judged worthy to fee you, by Damat your mod 
" excellent Bifhop, and by your very worthy Pref- 
cc byters Bafjus and Apollonius^ and by my Fellow- 
■" Servant Sotio your Deacon ^ . in whom I rejoice, 
cc forafmuch as he is fubjeft unto his Bifhop, as 
" to the Grace of God^ and to the Presbytery, as 
a to the Law of Jefus Chrift} I determined to 
£ write unto you. Seft. 1. He thinks it proper to 
caution them in this manner, tc Wherefore it will 
ct become you alfo, not to take advantage of the 
cc Youth of your Bifhop, but to yield all Reve- 
cc rence to him, according to the Power of God 
" the Father (the Authority given him by God); 
'* as alfo I perceive that your holy Presbyters do: 
cc Not confidering his Age, which indeed to ap- 
" pearance is young •, but as becomes thofe who 
Y are Prudent in God, fubmitting to him, or ra- 
" ther not to him, but to the Father of our Lord 
u Jefus Chrift, the Bifhop of us all. It will there- 
" fore behove you, with all Sincerity, to obey 
" your Bifhop, in Honour of him, whole Pleafure 

Episcopacy Afferted. i 2 3 

* c it is, that you fhould do fo. Becaufe he that 
cc does fo, deceives nor the Bifhop, whom he fees h 
" but affronts him that is Invifible. For whatfo- 
" ever of this kind is done, it reflects not upon 
cc Man, but upon God, who knows rhe Secrets of 
cc our Hearts. Setf- 4. It is therefore fitting, fays 
he, tc that we fhould not only be called Chriftians, 
" but be fo. As fome call indeed their Governor, 
" Bifhop ^ but yet do all things without him. But 
" I can never think, that fuch as thefe have a gpod 
v Confidence, feeing they are not gathered toge- 
cc ther according to God's Commandment. Se8.6. 
u I exhort you, that you ftudy to do all things in 
cc a Divine Concord: Your Bifhop prefiding in the 
$ place of God \ your Presbyters in the place of 
" the Council of the Apoftles^ and your Deacons 
'? being intrufted with the Minifiry of Jefus Chrift, 
Se8.-j. Having premifed, " Be you united to your 
u Bifhop, and thofe who prefide over you, to be 
c: your Pattern and Direction in the way to Im- 
<c mortality ^ he goes on in Exhorting them, " As 
cc therefore the Lord did nothing without xkt Fa- 
cc ther, being united to him, neither by himfelf, 
c; nor yet by his Apofftes : So neither do you any 
cc thing without your Bilhop, and Presbyters. Nei- 
" ther endeavour to let any thing appear Rational 
" to your felves apart 5 but being come together: 
(; into the fame place, have one Common Prayer, 
Seff. 15. After mention made of " their moft wor- 
M thy Bifhop, and the well -wrought Spiritual 
" Crown of their Presbytery, (as he expreffes it) 
'■ and their Deacons, who are according to God : 
He admonifhes them again, tc Be fubje£t to your 
" Bifhop, and to one another, (Le. the Deacons 
to the Presbyters, and all other Inferiors to their 
Superiors) " as Jefus Chrift to the Father accord - 
"■ ing to the Flefli 5 and the Apofties both to 
H CHrift, and to the Father, and to-the Holy Ghoft- 

a that 

124 ^ e ^ l v l N £ ^ z G S T °f 

" that fo you may be united both in Body, and 
ie Spirit. And laftiy, SeS. 1%. "The Epbefians 
cc from Smyrna, fays he, falute you, ( thofe were 
they whom the Churches of the Smyrn&ans, and 
lEphefians had fent with him) " together with Po- 
r ly car pus the Bifhop of the Smyrn<eans. 

In his Epiftie to the Trallians, Seft. i. we meet 
with the Name of their Bifhop, viz. Po/ybiw. 
Seft. 2. Amonglt thofe things wherein they (hewed 
themfelves the Followers of God, he takes notice 
of this, " That they were fubjeO: to their Bifhop, 
" as to Jefus Chrift. And in the fame place he 
tells them, " It is neceffary, that as you do •, fo 
" without your Bifhop, you fhould do nothing. 
" Alfo be you fubjecl: to your Presbyters, as to 
<c the Apoftles of Jefus Chrift. Sell. 3. " In like 
cc manner, fays he, let all Reverence the Deacons, 
" as Jefus Chrift} and the Bifhops, as the Father ^ 
cc and the Presbyters, as the Sanhedrim of God, 
w and College of the Apoftles. Without thefe 
" there is no Church. Seff.-j. Advifing them to 
guard themfelves againft thePoifon of Hereticks^ 
u And^ that you will do, fays he, if you are not 
cc puffed up 5 but continue infeparable from Jefus 
" Chrift our God 5 and from your Bifhop ^ and 
cc from the Commands of the Apoftles. He that 
tc is within the Altar, is pure : But he that is 
" without ; /. e. does any thing without the Bi- 
" (hop, and the Presbyters, and Deacons - y is not 
" pure in his Confcience. Setf. 1 2. Having ex- 
horted them cc to continue in Concord among them- 
u felves, and in Prayer with one another ^ he fub- 
joins, " It becomes every one of you, efpecially 
* the Presbyters, to refrefh your Bifhop to the 
" Honour of the Father, of Jefus Chrift, and of 
" the Apoftles. And laftiy, Set?. 14. " Fare you 
c * well, fays he, in Jefus Chrift ^ being fubjecl: to 

/iC your 

Episcopacy Ajjerted. 125 

cc your Bifhop, as to the Command of God $ and 
" fo likewife to the Presbytery. 

In his Epiltle to the Fhiladelphians, in the very 
Inscription, " He falutes them in the Blood of Je- 
" fus Chrift:, efpecially if they are at Unity with 
" the Bifhop, and Presbyters who are with him, 
" and the Deacons appointed according to the 
" Mind of Jefus Chrift. Se3. $. Having commend- 
ed their Bifhop, he lays down this, " As many as 
" are of Jefus Chrift, are alfo with their Bifhop. 
Setf. 4. " Let it be your endeavour, fays he, to 
" partake all of the fame holy Eucharift. After 
which follows, " For there is one Altar h as alfo 
" there is one Bifhop, together with his Presby- 
" tery, and the Deacons : That fo whatfoever you 
" do, you may do it according to the Will of God. 
Seff.-j* "Attend to the Bifhop, and to the Pref- 
" by tery, and to the Deacons. Setf. 8. Speaking 
of the Repentance of Hereticks, and Seducers ^ 
" The Lord forgives all that repent, if they re- 
" turn to the Unity of God, and to the Council 
" of the Bifhop. Sell. 10. Advifing them to de- 
pute fome Deacon, to congratulate the Church of 
Antiocb upon its Settlement in Peace ^ he tells 
them, " That the other Neighbouring Churches 
M had fent them fome, Bifhops , fome, Presbyters 5 
" and fome, Deacons. 

In his Epiftle to the Smyrrutans^ Seel. 8. he ex- 
horts them thus, " Follow your Bifhop, as Jefus 
tf Chrift, the Father •, and the Presbytery, as the 
" Apoftles. As for the Deacons, Reverence them, 
" as the Command of God. Let no Man do any 
" thing, of what belongs to the Church, without 
M the Bifhop. Let the Eucharift be look'd upon 
" as firm and juft, which is either offer'd by the 
* Bifhop, or by him to whom the Bifhop has 
" given his confent. Wherefoever the Bifhop (hail 
ct appear, there let the People alfo be : As where 


i 16 The D I V I N E R I G H T 0jf 

" Jefus Chrift is, there is the Catholick Church. 
" It is not lawful without the Bifhop, neither to 
u Baptife, nor to celebrate the Holy Communion : 
" But whatfoever he fhall approve of, that is alfo 
" pleafi'ng unto God •, that fo whatever is done 5 
" may be fecure, and well done. And a little af- 
ter, " It is a good thing, to have a due Regard both 
" to God, and to the Bifhop. He that Honours 
" the Bifhop, (hall be Honoured of God. But he 
<c that does any thing without his Knowledge, 
" minifters unto the Devil. And Seff. 12. " I fa- 
cc lute, fays he, your very worthy Bifhop, and 
" your venerable Presbytery -, and your Deacons, 
" my Fellow-Servants. 

In his Epiftle to Poly car p± the Infcription runs 
thus : " Ignatius , who is alfo called Theophorus^ 
* ; to Polycarp Bifhop of the Church which is at 
a Smyrna, - Self. 4. He befpeaks Poly carp in this 
manner, w Let not the Widows be negleQed : Be 
* thou after God^ their Guardian. Let nothing 
" be done, but with thy Knowledge and Confent. 
Sett. 5. " If any one thinks, fays he, that he knows 
" more than the Bifhop, he is ruined. But it be- 
" comes all fuch as are Marry'd, whether Men or 
w Women, to come together with the Confent of 
<c the Bifhop. Set!. 6. * Hearken unto the Bifhop, 
" that God alfo may hearken unto you. My Soul 
tt be Security for them, that fubmit to their Bi- 
tc (hop, with their Presbyters, and Deacons. And" 
in the fame place, befpeaking together the Bifhops, 
Presbyters, and Deacons^ " Labour with one ano- 
c " ther, fays he, as the Stewards (fo he calls the 
Bifhops) '"and Affeflbrs (fo the Presbyters) and 
" Minilters (fo the Deacons) of God. 

2. That thofe lingular Bifhops, by ChriftV In- 
ftitution, were appointed every where throughout 
the World, where-ever the Chriftian Religion was 
planted. For in his Epiftle to the Ephe/tans r 

Se8. % 

Episcopacy Afferted. 1 27 

. 3. he tells them, " That Jefus Chrift is the 
fct Mind of the Father ^ as the Bifhops appointed 
" even unto the utmoft Bounds of the Earth, are 
« the Mind of Jefus Chrift. 

3. That to thofe lingular Bifhops, Honour, Sub- 
jection,, or Obedience was due by all in the Church, 
even by the Presbyteries, in the fame manner as it 
was paid either to God the Father by Chriit, or to 
Chrift by the Apoftles, or to the Apoftles by the 
reft. See before, AdEphef. Seel 2,4, 5,6, 20. Ad 
Smyrn. Sett. 8. Ad Polyc. Sed. 6. Ad Magn. SeQ. 2 3 
3,6,13. Ad Trail. Seel 2 3 3, 1 2, 1 3. AdPbiladelpb. 
Seft. 7. 

4. That Union with the Bifhop was fo necefTary 
to be kept, by all the Members of the Church, that 
whoever feparated himfelf from his Bifhop, was 
reputed thereby to be cut off from the Church it 
felf. See Ad Epbef. Seft. 5. Ad Magn. Seft. 6, 7, 
13. Ad Trail. Sect. 3 7 7. Ad Pbiladelpb. Infcript. 

5. That without the Bifhop's Licenfe, nothing 
ought to be done in the Church. For which fee 
Ad Magn. Seft. 4, 6, 7. Ad Trail. Sea. 2, 7. Ad 
Pbiladelpb, Seel 4. which he concludes, " That fo 
a whatsoever you do, you may do it according to 
« the Will of God. And SeS. 7. " The Spirit, 
fays he, " fpake, faying on this wife, Do nothing 
" without the Bifhop. Ad Smyrn. Sq^.S. AdPo*- 
lye. Seel. 4, $-. 

6. That after the Bifhop, Honour and Obedi- 
ence was likewife due to the Presbyters, and the 
Deacons. For which fee Ad Epbef. Seel. 2, 20. 
Ai Magn. Sea. 2, 6, 7, 1 3. Ad Trail. Sea. 2, To 
which he adds, "The Deacons are not the Mini- 
a fters of Meat and Drink, but of the Church of 
"God. SecT.^7,13, Ad Pbiladelpb. Seft. 7,10. 
Ai Smyrn. Seel 8, i 7, Ad Pzlyc. Seft, 6. 


128 The Divine Right of 

That we may have the Teftimonies of all the; 
Apoltolical Fathers, whereof any thing remains to 
us, relating to this Subject ; I (hall add two or 
three Quotations out or St. Hermes Shepherd ^ 
which notwithftand'ing his Allegorical way of Wri- 
ting, are pretty plain to my purpofe. It is highly 
probable, that the Author of that Book was that 
Hernias, whom St. Paul mentions, Rom. xvi. 14. 
as one of his Acquaintance in the Church of Rome. 
In his Book of Vifwns he has then thefe words ^ 
* " And thou (halt write two Books $ and fend one 
" to Clement, and one to GraptL For Clement (hall 
" fend it to the foreign Cities, becaufe it is permit- 
cc ted him fo to do. But Grapte fhall admonifh 
" the Widows and Orphans. But thou malt read 
c; it to the Elders that are over the Church. Here 
is a clear Diilinftion made between St Clement and 
the Elders of the Church : Whether he was the 
Metropolitan, and they his Suffragans ^ or he the 
Bifhop, and they the Presbyters of the fecond Or- 
der , is not material here. And again , ,t " The 
cC fquare and white Stones, which agree exactly 
" in their Joints-, are the Apoftles, and Bifhops, 
" and Doctors, and Minifters, who through the 
" Mercy of God are come in, and exercifed Epif- 
" copacy, and taught, and miniiired holily and 
lc modeftly to the EiecT: of God, both' that are 
" fallen aileep, and which yet remain, and have 
" always agreed with them, and have had Peace 
cc within themfelves, and with each other. In his 
Book of Similitudes, )| " Thefe are fuch as have 
cc believed , and fome of them been Bifhops, i. e. 
" Governors of the Churches ; then fuch as have 
" been fet over inferior Miniftries. 

* Herm. Sheph. Lib. 1. Vif. 2. Seft. 5. t Ibid. Vif. 3. Seft. $1 
|; Lib. 3. Sim. 9. Seft. 27/ 

5 And- 

Episcopacy Afferted. i i$ 

And fo you have an account of the Inftitutiori 
of the Hierarchy, and the firft State of it, accord- 
ing to the Apoftolical Fathers, particularly St. Ig- 
natius Bilhop of Antioeh. 


Divers Proofs of the Continuation of the 
Hierarchy in the Church j and that 
there was no Innovation made in the 
Dijlin&ion of the Degrees, in the 
Time of Hyginus Bijhop of Rome. 

IT being a thing very difficult, if not abfolutely 
impoffible, as I have intimated before, to afligri 
the Time, wherein the pretended Change of Difci- 
pline was made, and when the Bifhops began to 
be diftinguifh'd from the Presbyters, as two diffe- 
rent Orders in the Church •, and that yet it mult 
have happen'd a little while after the Apoitles 5 
becaufe it cannot be denied, that that Diitin&iont 
is vifible about the middle of the fecond Century., 
which was not above fifty Years after the Death 
of them all : The Adverfaries of the Hierarchy do 
their utmoft to find out the Time of that Change, 
And indeed it imports them very much to labour 
towards it : For the Truth cf the Matter is there- 
by difcovered ^ it being certain, that if the Difci- 
pline was not changed in the fecond Century, but: 
the Government of the Church continued like than 
which has been in ufe ever fince \ Epifcopacy was 
alwavs an Order diftinguifh'd from Presbytery, 

R And 

130 The Divine Right of 

And that, on the contrary, if there was a Change 
made, it could not be brought about fecretiy - 
but the Clergy muft be confenting to it-, without 
which there would have been a great Difturbance 
in the Church : So that the thing muft be very 
fenfible. To unty which Knot, which is pretty 
hard ty'd •, they fix; that Time to the Year of our 
Lord 140. or thereabouts (for they are not fure of 
it) under Hyginus Bifhop oi'Rcwe : And thus they 
tell their Scory. Telefpborus Bifhop of that See, 
dying in the Year 139. Uyginus fucceeded him in 
the Epifcopal Chair \ which he held but four Years. 
This Man, fay they, to fignalize himfelfy or, as 
it is commonly exprefs'd by them, to introduce 
the Myftery of Iniquity into the Church, and lay 
the Foundation of ' Antichrijlianifm^ (though by 
the way he was an excellent Bifhop, who facri- 
ficed his Life for Jefus Chrift \ and whofs Piety, 
Zeal, and extraordinary Gifts we ought to cele- 
brate) this Man, to fignalize himfelf, as they fug- 
ged, changed the Form of the Ecclefhftical Go- 
vernment : And whereas there were but two Or- 
ders of Minifters in the Churchy viz. Presbyters 
or Bifhops, and Deacons •, he made of them three, 
dividing that of the Presbyterat or Epifcopat into 
two, which from the time of the Apoftles had 
been but one and the fame thing. And this they 
prove chiefly out of the Pontifical of Damafus y 
which fays, that Hyginus compofuit Clerum^ & pri- 
mus diftribuit Gradus. Thitherto, they tell us, 
there were feveral Bifhops in one Church, and the 
Bifhops were not above the Presbyters : But yet 
they own, that all the Presbyters were not chofen 
Bifhops before. And as to him who was fo, and 
was appointed to be the Prxfes of the Church ^ 
they pretend, that he thereby acquired no new 
Dignity, or Office * and that he was not fuperior 
to the others : And likewile that it was the oldefi 



Episcopacy Averted. 1 g 1 

in Age, or in the Miniftry, i.e. he who was the 
firft, as to the Date of his Admiffion, that fuc- 
ceeded to the Chair. But Hyginus obferviug, that 
that Cuftom, which yet according to them was 
Apoftolical} was fubjecl to many ill Confequences, 
and to feveral Accidents which might he preju- 
dicial to the Churchy and that, for tb$ moft parr, 
the ancienteft Presbyrers wete nor to 

fill the Chair, nor fo couragious : 
fome of their Brethren $ and io it wa; 3ry, 

that the Honour of the Glergy*(houid be kept 
and afferted by a Pallor, who was qualified to 
edifie the Church by his Talents, and the ftrength 
of his Piety, and Zeal $ and e\ en to f ai the Truth 
with his Blood, if there was occa Hon : He ordain- 
ed, that the ancient Form fhould be auered. And 
whereas the Nomination of the Primate was ufed 
to be made, but according to the Date of his Ad- 
miffion into the Miniftry, which gave him a Title 
to the Chair 5 and not by a free £le£lion of the 
Clergy, who were ty D d to chufe the oldeft Pref- 
byter upon the Death of the Prefident : The fame 
nyginus inftituted, that the. Choice fhould fall up- 
on every one equally, and indifi , according 
to the Plurality of Votes he might have, without 
regard to his Age, or Admiffion 5 and fo the Eie- 
Qion fhould be no longer limited to the ancienteft, 
but be extended to whom it fhould be thought fir, 
according to Capacity, and Merit. Such was the 
new Constitution, as we are told, of Hyginus Bi- 
fliop of Rome. 

Which was taken up, as they would make us 
believe, upon the fame Reafons, by the Church of 
Jerufaiem : Which having no more Presbyters of 
the Jewifh Nation, capable to fill up the Epifco- 
pai Chair ^ the Per fee ut ion having carry'd ofTmoff 
of them, or there being others more worthy 5 con- 
formed co the Pra&ice of Rcmc^ which insinuated 

K 2 ic 

t%2 Tlie Divine Right of 

it felf into all the other Chriftian Churches, where- 
in Epifcopacy was made a new Degree. For my 
part, I think, the Defign of Hyginus was very 
commendable * to abrogate a Cuftom, which gave 
the Government of the Church to Age, rather 
than to Merit, and the Capacity of the Perfon, 
And the Inftitution of the Apoftles^ which limited 
the Epifcopal Dignity to the ancienteft Presbyter., 
whatever his Endowments were, appears to me ill- 
conceived (fuppofing that to have been their Pra- 
Sice); Which I muft therefore deny. What In- 
conveniences would not happen at this Day to 
the Church, if that Method were to be purfued > 
Nothing would require more to be reformed. 
But finee it was found to be fo ill an Order in 
the time of Hyginus, that he judged it fit to be 
abrogated, left the Church (hould fuffer Prejudice 
thereby *, it is a plain fign to me, that it was not 
the Cuftom, or Praftice of the Apoftles, as it is 
pretended. And that m what that Bifhop did 
therein, he trod in the fteps of his Predeceflbrs 5 
and only confirmed amongft his Clergy, a Difci- 
pline, which he had received by an uninterrupted 
Tradition : So far from changing the Form of the 
Ecclefiaftical Government, or dividing what the 
Apoftles had joined together, and making a new 

I (hall therefore now, that I may not interrupt 

the account I intend to give of the courfe of the 

Hierarchy, by any,Digreffion, endeavour to confute 

that pretended Difcovery,upon which 

No itmovati- our Adverfaries lay fuch a ftrefs. And 

C l>7oikdDif- t0 th3t end l ihM make feVefal Re " 

Jplme^in Hy- ^ e ^ ons > whereby it will appear, that 
ginus'i time. there has been no change attempted 
in the Apoltolical Difcipline, in the 
time of Hyginus • but rather a Confirmation of it: 
And that the Faft, placed in that Age, viz. that 
t , Epifcopacy 

Episcopacy AJJerted. i 3 3 

Epifcopacy then began to be a fuperior Degree to 
Presbytery •, is ill-grounded, imaginary, and full of 
palpable Inconfiftencies. 

And 1. If Hyginus began by a Spi- Re ^^ l 
rit of Innovation, contrary to the 
PraQice of the Apoftles, and the Cuftom of the 
Church, to divide the Orders of Bifhop, and Pref- 
byter, which before were but one •, then it follows, 
that he was the firft, as is fuggefted, that made 
that Diftribution of the Degrees. But this is evi- 
dently falfe, as I am going to fhew by two or 
three Inftances in that very See. The Bifhops of 
Rome, his Predeceflbrs, had done the fame thing 
before him •, having diftinguifh'd the whole Body 
of the Clergy into three Orders, viz. Bifhops, 
Presbyters, and Deacons. Telefphorus himfelf, 
whom he immediately fucceeded, Ordained in his 
Life-time eight Deacons, fifteen Presbyters, and 
thirteen Bifhops ^ as we read it in Autnentick Hi- 
flory * After his Example Hyginus Ordained five 
Deacons, fifteen Presbyters, and fix Bifhops $ as 
we find it in the fame. If that be fo •, he did but 
what his Predeceflbr had done before him: He 
made therefore no Innovation in the Difcipline, 
which was at that time in ufe in the Church. 
And if the Orders of Presbyter, and Bifhop, were 
but one and the fame thing before his Days: Why 
did his Predeceflbrs ordain fome to be Presbyters, 
and others to be Bifhops ? I can fee no reafon of this 
Diltinftion, but what is grounded in the difference 
of the Offices. However the Matter of Fa£ is 
plain ^ viz. that the Ordination of Bifhops, and 
Presbyters, was obferved in the See of Rome, be- 
fore the Conftitution of Hyginus. And if that 
does not imply fome Difference or DiltinQion-, 

* Anaft, Bibl. de Vic. Pone. Rom. Plar. & alii ; with * litiU 

K 3 &m 

1 34 The Divine Right of 

then our Adverfaries mutt fay, that the Ordination 
of a Presbyter was the Ordination of a Bifhop, 
and vice verfd $ and that the Bifhops who were 
ordained Bifhops, had but the Ordination of Pref- 
byters : For what did they receive, more, when 
they were ordained Bifhops, in the Opinion of our 
Adverfaries ? But then again, what fhould induce 
Telejphonis, and his Predeceifors, to ordain fome 
Presbyters Bifhops, and not fome Bifhops Presby- 
ters , ' t iS it is implied in tho.fe Accounts ? I fay, his 
Pre s : For Xijius i who fat in the Epifco- 

pal Chair of Rome immediately before him ^ had 
likewife diitinguifh'd the feveral Ordinations $ 
having conferred the Order of the Diacona.t, on 
eleven Perfons-, of thePresbyterat, on fo many •, and 
of the Epifcopar, on four : as Alexander^ his im- 
mediate PredecclTor, had Ordained three Deacons, 
five Presbyters, and five Bifhops. The Bifhops of 
the other Sees did the fame^ as might eafily be' 
made out here, if it were neceiTary. All which 
(hews, that Uyginus did not alter the ancient 
Difcipline 5 but that he kept clofe to it, confor- 
mably to the Tradition of his Fathers. 

2. What is infinuated above con- 
ftr/ift 2. cerning the Church of Jerujalem % 
viz. that they left off chufing the 
oldeft Presbyter for Bifhop, is not altogether con- 
fident with what our Adverfaries would conclude 
from its Pratt ice •, that it (truck in with the new 
Conftitution of Hyginus ; For it was in the Year of 
our Lord 1 5 5, or 1 36, as appears from Ecclefiaftical 
Hiftoryt-, that other Presbyters than of the Jewifh 
Nation, began to hold that See. The Difcipline 
was then altered in the Church of Jerufalem^ be- 
fore it was in that of Rome ^ fuppofing it ever 
was fo. But I muft make a Remark upon this 

■ 'ii ■ - ■ ■ ■ ■ m m i n 11 11 _ y . 1 m 

t Eufeb. Hift. EccL lib. 4. cap. 5. & alibi. 


Episcopacy Afferted. 135 

matter, which will fet it in its true Light; and 
ferve for an Anfwer to the Point in hand. And it 
is this : That from the time of the Apoftles, to 
the Year 136, they were always Clergymen, or 
Presbyters of Jeiviih Extraction, who were pro- 
moted to the Epifcopal See of Jerufalem. It was 
not therefore their Age, or the Date of their Ad- 
miflion into the Minittry, that gave them that Pre- 
ference, but their advantage of being Jews. For 
if a Presbyter in that Church was delcended from 
a Gentile, till that time \ he was excluded from 
the Chair: Not becaufehe was younger, as to his 
Admiflion •, but becaufe he was not a Jew. So 
that the Jewifh Presbyter, admitting that the 
Greek was ancienter in Age, or Time of Inftitu- 
tion, ftep'd before him into the Chair. Which 
proves almoft demonftratively, that the Presbyter 
did not fucceed to the Epifcopal See of Jerufalem^ 
by the Order of Age. For what likelihood is 
there, that precifely from the Days of the Apo- 
ftles to the Year 136. wherein are reckoned no 
lefs than fifteen Jewifh Bifhops •, there ihould not 
be in that Church a Greek, or a Roman Presby- 
ter, more ancient, as to his Age, or Admiflioo, 
than thofe feveral Jews, who came one after ano- 
ther into the Chair ? But the Truth of the Matter 
is ^ thaf at firft, either out of refpect to our Lord's 
Family, or that particular Nation, who were God's 
peculiar People v they were confider'd before others: 
Or that afterwards continuing to be more nume- 
rous than the reft there, where the Converts of 
that Extraction retained an Affection for the Cir- 
cumcifion, and fome other of the Mofaick Rites ^ 
it was thought prudent to indulge them in that 
Privilege. This feems to me to have been' the true 
Reafon of the Ufage of that Church : Which de- 
ftroys the Opinion of thofe who pretend, that the 
^ncienteft Presbyter fucceeded of courfe to the 

K 4 Epifcopal 

i%6 The Divine Right of 

Epifcopal Dignity, by a Cuftom derived from the 
Practice of the Apoftles. That is a pure effect of 
Imagination, which fuppofes the thing, without 
proving it -, and even againft all appearance, as I 
have (hewn, as being contrary to Reafon. 

3. If the Reafons I have given, are 
#*?#?#. 3. not thought convincing enough -, I 
will offer one Inftance in the fame 
Church of Jcrufalem *, which will, I hope, put 
the thing out of difpute, that it was not the 
Cuftom of the Apoftles, to prefer the Presbyters 
to that See, according to their Seniority. Had 
it been their Intention to fettle fuch an Ufage 
in the Chriftian Church, by their own Practice, 
they would doubtlefs have appointed the Senior 
%o be the Bifhop, when an Opportunity prefented 
it felf •, and particularly when the See of Jeruja- 
Jem was firft eftablifh'd, they would have chofen 
amongft themfelves the firft, as to his Call, for 
that Dignity \ and that would have been by that 
means St. Andrew, or St. John, or St. Yeter. But 
they were fo far from going by that pretended Rule, 
in that Cafe, that they pitch'd upon James the 
Lefs, who was none of the twelve Apoftles : That 
after- Ages might learn from this Example, that 
the future Admiflions into the Epifcopal Order, 
were not to proceed according to the Ancjentnefs, 
or Priority of the Call of the Perfons 5 but were 
left free to the Election of thofe who had a Right 
to make it. If then Men will conform themfelves 
to what was practifed by the Apoftles, in the ap- 
pointing of a Bifhop -, they muft not pretend, that 
the Choice ought neceffarily to fall upon the old- 
eft Presbyter. But I cannot but wonder, how 
Without any Proof, and againft fo authentick a one 
as this, taken from the Election of Si. James unto 
the See of Jcrufalem -, our Adverfaries have the 
Confidence to maintain, that the Cuftom of tbq 


Episcopacy Afferted. 1 37 

Church has always been, from the very time of 
the Apoftles to the Year 140. to chufe the oldeft 
Presbyter to be the Bifhop : Since the contrary is 
fo evident, even in the beginning of that Eftablifh- 
ment ! And who has told them, that all the Pref- 
byters that fucceeded St. James in the See of Je~ 
rufalem^ were ancienter Presbyters than their Bre- 
thren > This, I think, may very well be look'd 
upon as a meer Suppofition, made on purpofe to 
hammer out the pretended Innovation of Hyginus 
in the Difcipline of the Church. 

But, 4. Admitting, that that Bi- R ~^ 
(hop of Rome did really alter the 
ancient Polity of his Church ^ what Influence could 
that have upon the Church of Jerufalem ? Coald 
the Example of Hyginus perfuade this Clergy, all 
on a fudden, to change the Form of their Eccle- 
fiaftical Government ? The difta.nce of thofe two 
Churches did fcarce allow of fuch a Correfpon- 
dence. And though the Jealoufie, which might be 
between thofe two Churches of Jerufalem , and 
Rome 5 (hould not have kept the former, which 
was as the Mother of all the reft, from conform- 
ing to the Regulations of the latter* efpecially 
being contrary to thofe of the Apoftles : What 
likelihood is there, that all the other Chriftiaq 
Churches, whereof feveral were more famous at 
that time than the Roman , (hould have fa id no- 
thing againft fuch an Innovation -, but fhould have 
blindly embraced it? Would not Antioch, Ephefxj^ 
Corinth^ Alexandria, and many others have mur- 
mured, both in Afia, Europe, and Africa-, chat 
the Government of the Church was thus altered* 
Would not each Presbyter, who was he. Senior 
amongft his Sym-Presbyters, and confequemljr 
concern'd in this affair 3 have re 1 1 ighly of- 
fended at it : And would he ivt turned 
every Stone, to ward off the E v . of feeing 


138 The Divine Right of 

liimfelf depofed, as it were, from his juft Pre- 
eminency > What Noife would not this have 
caufed throughout the World ^ fince the fettling 
only of Eafter-Djiy, which fome would obferve 
precifely on the 14 th Day of the Moon of March ^ 
and others but on a Sunday •, occafioned fo many Di- 
vifions, with Excommunications in the Chriftian 
Church, that it took up a whole Age to pacific 
the contending Parties, about an Article indiffe- 
rent in it felt ? And yet our Adverfaries would 
make us believe, that an univerfal Tradition was 
unanimously changed, in all the Chriftian Churches 
without any one (tanding out: Which is incon- 
iiftent with common Senle. And we muft thence 
necefiarily conclude one of thefe two things ^ ei- 
ther that that change of Older, and Difcipline, 
owned to have defcended from the Apofties, did 
not really happen ^ but that the ancient EftablifH- 
nient was kept up ^ or that the Chriftian Churches 
throughout the World, were nor fo averfe to Epif- 
copacy, as fome are in our Days^ fince they fo 
Silently fubmitted to that pretended Innovation, 
againft which they fo openly declare at this time. 
$'. What is annex'd to the Story 
Refle8. $. of Hyginus, that upon the account 
of his having eftablilh'd a Diftin&ion 
between the Bifhop, and the Presbyter, in the 
Church of Rome, that See continued vacant four 
whole Years after him *, is as unlikely as the reft. 
For it was by no means the change of Difcipline, 
that occafioned that Vacancy ^ or that raifed a Dif- 
pute amonglt the Clergy about that Point, which 
lafted all that time, before the Chair could be fil- 
led up by their confent^ as it is alledged by our 
Adverfaries, without any manner of Proof, and ve- 
ry wrongfully. It is a great Injury done to the 
Memory, and Piety of thofe holy Men, to fuggeft 
fuch a thing # againft them *, whsn a jufter account 


Episcopacy Ajferted. 139 

$my be given of it. They laboured perhaps then un- 
der a fevere Perfecution •, their late Primate had al- 
ready laid down his Life in theCaufe of the Gofpel ; 
and they were at the Hour of doing the fame: So 
that they had other things to mind, than to divide, 
and quarrel amongft themfelves. And what ground 
is there to think, that whiift their Perfecutors 
were enraged againft them to that degree, that to 
avoid their Fury, they were forc'd to hide them- 
felves with their Flocks •, they (hould go and tear 
one another to pieces by their Animofities about 
the Bifhoprick ? The Station was not then fo 
charming, to be purfued at fuch a rate. Befides 
that there being but one, who according to the 
ancient Difcipline, as is pretended, could claim a 
Right of fucceeding to the Chair •, viz. the eldeft 
Presbyter*, and confequentiy but one, that had an 
Intereft to oppofe that Deliberation •, fappofing 
that the reft were for pracYifing a new way : The 
matter would have been foon decided. For the 
other Presbyters being thereby put into a capacity 
of afpiring to the Epifcopai Dignity, would pro- 
bably have voted for a free EleQion, in hope every 
one of being chofen the firft Minifxer of that See. 
Ambition would have carry'd it with a high hand •, 
(I fpeak according to the fenfe our Adverfaries 
have of fuch Men) and efpecially the laft Primate 
they had at their Head, having judged the Order 
good, and necelTary. And where was the ground 
for a Difpute, which fhould laft four Years ? Hy- 
ginus in his Life- time had ordained fix Bifhops, 
as we have taken notice. How eafie was it then 
to take the Senior amongft them, according to 
the ancient Cuftom-, and to put him into the 
place of the Deceafed ! That might have been dif- 
patched prefently, and without jarring. Or if the 
other five Bifhops had any Pretention to the See, 
according to the new Conftitution of Uygmus • 


140 The Divine Right of 

how foon might the thing have been decided by 
a free Election, which would immediately have 
carry 3 d it over that, which reftrained it to the 
Eldeft in refpeot of AdmhTion? There was no need, 
that Controverfie fhould held out four full Years. 
What was then the Caufe of that long Vacancy 
of the Epifcopal See of Rome ? If that could not 
be discovered, a fair Excufe might be pleaded for 
it : It is not fo obvious, to dive into all the Se- 
crets, and aU the Circumstances of ancient Hifto- 
xy *, how many confiderable Events of thofe Times 
are there unknown to us ? But the ftate of that 
Church in the fecond Age of the Gofpel, may 
help us to a fenfible account of that Vacancy. 
The Chriftian Church in general, lay almoft all 
that while under the Crofs * but particularly that 
of Rome, as being moft expofed to the Fury of 
the Emperor ^ who profefling the Pagan Religion, 
could not brook under his fight, in the Capital of 
his Empire, a fet of Men, who were endeavour* 
ing to deftroy the eftablifh'd Worfhip, by bringing 
in a new one •, againft which Earth , and Hell 
feemed to have confpired together. It is proba- 
ble, the Clergy was at that time fo haraffed, and 
the Flock fo difmayed, that there was no Govern- 
ing of the Church with any Order. It is poflible 
likewife, that the Paftors were fo difperfed, that 
they could not be got together without the ut- 
moft hazard, And as the Thunderbolt of Perfecu- 
tion ufually lighted upon him, who fat in the 
Epifcopal Chair, above any other of the Faithful s 
becaufe the Heathens levelled their Spite directly 
at him, as being the Head, and chief Director of 
the Body. (For which reafon fome abfolutely re- 
fufed that Dignity, when it was offered them, in 
thofe perillous Times t doubting their Conftancy, 
if they fhould be called to frffer Martyrdom, 
which was then in a manner unavoidable.) And 


Episcopacy Afferted. 141 

as likewife Charity began to wax cold ^ the Zeal, 
and Courage of the Paftors daily abating through 
the fiercenefs of the fiery Tryals : There was per- 
haps not one found, who would undertake Hy- 
ginus's place, whofe Blood was but newly fhed -, as 
that of his PredecefTor's had been before. ' Every one 
feared for his own Life •, and declined to appear 
at the Head of a Church , which was fo cruelly 
perfecuted. And thus four Years paffed away -, 
and none whatfoever durft take upon him the 
Quality of Bifhcp of Rome^ until Pius, more 
daring th3n the reft, ventured to leap into the 
Chair. Which would not have happened fo, if 
the eldeft Presbyter had been ufed to fucceed to 
the See, by the Right of his Priority, and the 
Date of his Admiflion into the Miniftry. He had 
but to ltep into the room of his Predeceffor •, he 
had no need of an Election : He had but to uk 
his Title, which was as ancient as the Time of 
the Apoftles. And if he would not have accepted 
of the Epifcopal Dignity > he would have been 
look'd upon with Contempt, as unworthy of his 
facred Calling $ and another would have been 
brought over his Head. Impute we then that Va- 
cancy of four Years in the Epifcopal See of Rome, 
to the fevere Perfecution of the Heathens at that 
time^ to the Humane Fearfulnefs of the Mini- 
fters, or fome other Accidents ^ as the true occa- 
lion of it : And not to the Divifion, and Diffe- 
rences of the Clergy about the Pel ion that -was to 
fucceed to it. 

6. The Ordination which appears &.&#, $ 
here to have been conferr'd upon a 
Presbyter, when he was called to be a Bifhop^ is 
a convincing Argument, that he was thereby con- 
fecrated to a new Office. For to what end was he 
Ordained again ^ and to what purpofe were, the 
Hands of the Bifhops laid on him anew * if the 


142 The Di viiti Right of 

Epifcopal Funftion was not diftinguifh'd from the 
Presbyterial ? He had already received Ordination, 
and had been admitted into the Miniftry, when 
he was made Presbyter-, if not when he was in- 
fti tuted Deacon. If therefore the Orders of Bi- 
(hop, and Presbyter, are one and the fame-, there 
was no need to reiterate the Ordination, and to 
ufe a new Form. The eldeft Presbyter, without 
obferving any holy Ceremony, upon the Vacancy 
of a See, had but to take the place of his Prede- 
ceflbr^ and to fay, that he was Bifhop by Right 
of Succeflion: And that the Presbyter, and the 
Bifhop being the fame Officer ^ he flood in no 
need of Impofition of Hands, or Confecration, 
for his Inftallation. Why then did the above- 
mentioned Bifhops of Rome renew the Formality, 
when they admitted one into the Epifcopal Order $ 
though he had received that of Presbyter, or Dea- 
con before ? Whence we ought to conclude, that 
fince before Hygi/ius°s time, his Predeceflbrs in that 
See, by a conftant, and univerfal Practice of the 
Church, Ordained with a facred Ceremony the Pref- 
byter, whom they made a Bifhop ^ and that that 
Promotion to the Epifcopat, was confequently a 
diftin£l Ordination from the former 2 He did but 
confirm the Dlfcipline already eftabliihM, by an 
exprefs Conftitution, left it fhould be afterwards 
violated. And Jikewife that the Primitive Church 
look'd upon that Ordination, as diftinguifli'd from 
the other ^ and as entitling the Pcrfon to a new 
Authority, and a fuperior Degree. 

CH A ft 

Episcopacy Ajferted. 143 


A Proof of the Ejlablijliment of Epifcfc 
pacy by the Apojiles in the Church of 
Rome^ and that it was in ^Ufe there 
during the frft Century. 

IT is fufficient, one would think, to fhew ? that 
there was no Innovation made at Rome in the 
Difcipline delivered by the Apoftles, a boat the 
middle, or towards the beginning of the fecond 
Century ^ that I have laid out the Form of theEc- 
clefiaftical Government, as it was obferved under 
Xiftus , Telefpbarus , and Hyginus. But becaufe 
it may be faid, that poflibly there is a miftake of 
fome Years, as to the Time that That happened ; 
and that perhaps it was before thofe Biihops 
came to the See ^ fo that the thing may be true 
notwithftanding : And the more, by reafon it is 
pretended, that there was at firft no difference be- 
tween a Bifliop, and a Presbyter. Let us now fee, 
what was the Polity of that Church in the Apo- 
ftolical Age, and immediately after-, and let us 
examine, whether it did not continue the lame 
from the beginning. The Arguments I have ufed^ 
and the Examples I have produced, do eafiiy over- 
throw that Poficion, that the Epifcopat, and tha 
Presbyterat were not two diftinfl Offices in the 
time of the Apoftles : I humbly conceive, I have 
fully made appear rhe contrary. But fuppofing it 
imaginable, that fuch a change of Difcipline could 
be wrought under the Eyes of fome of the Apo- 
files, who might be (till alive about the begin- 
ning of the 1 fecond Century \ and in the fight of 

f • thofe 

144 The Divine Right of 

thofe Difciples, who had been Auditors of their 
Do&rine, and that none of them fhould gainfay 
fuch an Innovation ; which, as our Adverfaries tell 
us, tended to corrupt Religion, and to raife the 
Ambition of the Clergy : My bufinefs at prefent 
is to prove, that in this very Church of Rome^ 
where that Change is laid, the Government has 
been the fame from the very Foundation of it. 

That St. Paul preach'd the Gofpel at Rome, is 
agreed on all hands : But whether St. Peter was 
ever there ? Who was his immediate Succeflbr ? 
Whether he appointed one, or more Bifhops id 
it, in his Life-time ? Whether Linus was Bifhop 
of that See before Clemens ^ or this before Cletus i 
or Anacletus, if they were two Perfons ? are intri- 
cate Queftions in Ecclefiaftical Hiftory ; and not 
neceffary to be difcufs'd here. For it i£ confefs'd 
on each fide, that Linus, Clemens, Cletus or Ana- 
cletus, and Evareflus, were Bifhops, and the firft 
in the See of Rome -, whereof the two former by 
the Appointment of the Apoltles$ but whether of 
St. Peter, or St. Paul, I fhall not now determine. 
Thefe Men, at leaft two of them, had feen the 
Apoltles, and had been inftituted into theMiniftry 
by them 5 they were their Fellow-Labourers, and 
ordained Bifhops in their time, being their Co- 
temporaries j as appears from fome Paflages in 
" Scripture. And all b Antiquity teftifies the fame. 
As for Linus, who is the lame the Apoftle men- 
tions } c Eufebius, in more than one place, would 
have him be Bifhop of Rome after the Martyrdom 
of St. Peter, and St. Paul-, (which muft be about 
the twelfth Year of Nero's Reign, and of Chrift the 
65 th ) d and to have held that See twelve Years. 

a Philip, iv. 3. 2 Tim. iv. 21. 

* Iren. adv. Har. Hb. 5. cap. 3. Hier. Cat. 

6 Eufcb. Hift. Ecclef. li,b. ?. cap. 2. d Ibid. cap. 13. 


Episcopacy Averted. 1 45 

But others make him Bifhop there, eftablifh'd by 
Si. Peter (more probably St. Paul J fix Years be- 
fore their Deaths viz. about the Year 59. 'So 
that Linus having held the See of Rome eighteen 
* Years, he will have died in the Year of our Lord 77. 
Which is not improbable ^ it being ^very likely, 
that he was one of the Roman Clergy, at the time 
of St. PauPs being firft a Prifoner there $ and that 
he ferved that Church under him , or St. Peter 5 
t and might be left to fupply St. Paul's room, upon 
his departure to plant the Gofpel elfewhere. Af- 
ter Linus followed Anac/etus, as b Eufebius would 
have it : And c he fat in the Chair twelve Years, 
till about 91. 

The Romijh Writers think, the Hiftorian is In 
an Error ^ and that C/etus muft be inferted be- 
tween ^ making two Bifhops of Rome of C/etus^ 
and Anacletus ^ and fuppofing that C/etus fucceed- 
ed Linus , and Anacletus C/etus. According to 
this Account , here are befides St. Peter , and 
St. Paul i two or three Bithops, who hold the E- 
pifcopal Chair of Rome till the Year of God 91. 
For Anac/etus was in it till then. After them 
came C/emens b according to d Eufebius, and he died 
about the Year 100. Then e Evarefius^ who go- 
verned that See till the Year 108. Then Alexan- 
der \ iffc. But as for Clemens , who was un- 
doubtedly like wife Bifhop of Rome -, Hiftorians are 
not agreed where to place him : For fome make 
him St. Peter's immediate Succeffbr^ others put 
him after Linus, and others after C/etus or Ana- 
c/etus. The ground of this Diverfity of Opinions 
lies here ; that g Tertu/lian, and feveral others of 

_ m 1 .1 . 1 

4 Geo. Sync. Chronogr. a Jac. Goar. edit. p. 541. 

b Eufeb. Hift. Ecclef. lib. 3. cap. 13. c Ibid cap. i 5, 

d Ibid. cap. 34. e Ibid. lib. 4. cap. 1. 

f Iren. adv. Haer. lib. 3. cap. 3. 

* Tert. de Praefcript. Harr. cap. 32. 

L the 

1^6 The Divine Right of 

the Latins; and even the Compiler of the || Apofto- 
lical Confti unions, have delivered it in their Wri- 
tings, that St. Peter committed the Epifcopal Chair 
of Rome to prefide in it •, and that he did 
fo And yet. tho 5 that Commiflion mult be granted 
him before the Year 6$. wherein St. Peter , and 
St. Paul fuffer'd Martyrdom 5 it is evident, that 
he lived till the Year 100. during which Interval 
there were feveral Bifhops, who governed that 
Church in chief. But itill it may be fafely af- 
firmed, that he was Bifhop of Rome at the fame 
time that Linus was$ though he furvived him, as 
aifo Get us or Anacletus •, and though thefe held 
the See before he died. For it is molt certain, by 
the forecited Teftimonies ^ and the Liber Pontifi- 
calis of Damafus, or Anaflafius, and other Romiffj 
Writers ^ that he was appointed Bifhop of Rome 
by the Apoftles ^ that he had their Do&rtne and 
Difcipline frefh in his Mind *, and that St. Peter 
committed his Chair to him : So that the begin- 
ning of his Epifcopat muft be placed with Linus^ 
or foon after. It is true, Eufebius reckons him 
after Anacletus^ and allows him but about nine 
Years in that See : Which muft be underftood, 
when he became fole Bifhop of the whole Church. 
And indeed, if Men would take the Conjecture of 
two very Learned, and Judicious Perfons ^ it would 
help very much to extricate molt of thefe Difficul- 
ties-, viz. t " That there were two Divifions, or 
cc Congregations of the Chriftians at Rome ^ one 
" of the Jewifh, and the other of the Gentile 
cc Converts h over the former of which St. Peter 
" prefided, and over the latter St. Paul : So that 
" one might fubftitute Clemens in his room, and 

|| Conft. Apoft. lib. 7. cap. 47. 

f Grot. Annoc. in Apoc. if* 3. Hammond. Diflerc. $. c. 1 
de EpiTc. Jur. 


Episcopacy AJferted. 147 

* the other Linus. Which feems to have been 
" practifed at Antioch, Ephefus, Corinth • and pro- 
" bably in fome other Churches, where there was 
" the like occafion. 

This Account I have thought neceflary to give, 
and to lay out this Plan -, that I may draw thence 
the Evidence of the Proof I intend to offer, to 
fhew what was the Difcipline of the Apoftles, 
and their firft Succeflbrs, in the Church of Rome$ 
and that the Subordination in the Mintftry was 
then in ufe there : There being conftantly at the 
Head of that Clergy a chief Paftor, who had 
the Superintendency , and Government of that 
Flock. You may obferve in that AbftracT:, which 
is indifputable as to the Subftance, though there 
is fome diverfity in the Circumftances ♦, that Li- 
nus, and Clemens were ordained Minifters in the 
time of St. Peter, and St. Paul-, that Linm was 
made Bifhop of Rome ^ that St. Peter committed 
his Chair to Clemens : And that Get us or Ana* 
cletus fucceeded to that See ; then Evareftus, A~ 
lexander, &c. In the Days of St. Peter, and 
St. Paul then, there were Pallors fettled at Rome^ 
who were Bifhops : Linus, and Clemens were fo. 
There were probably then in the fame City other 
Minifters, befides them : But yet the Hiftorians do 
not tell us, that St. Peter, or St. Paul appointed 
them Bifhops of that Church •, they name only Li- 
nus, and Clemens, as fuch. They do not ( I mean 
the Latin Hiftorians) even give St. Paul the Title 
of Bifhop of Rome. Which turns upon what I in- 
timated before, (if the Conjecture ofGrotius, and 
Hammond will not be accepted ) viz. that when 
a Church was Populous, or like to become fo-, the 
Apoftles inftituted feveral Biftiops for the Service 
of it, who were as Coadjutors of the proper Pri- 
mate, to help him out upon feveral Occafions; 
and to fuc.ceed him after his Death •, or only Titu- 

L 2 lar 

148 The Di vine Right of 

lar ones, without any particular Flocks appropria- 
ted to them, but ready at hand to take the care 
of fuch as mould be gathered : As many Presby- 
ters, and' Deacons are Ordained at this Day for the 
Cures, and other Imployments, which may require 
their Miniftration, at the Difcrerion of the Bifhop. 
But that ftiil there was one appointed amongft 
them, to be the Bifhop of the See in chief-, to 
whom the Government of it belonged, and who 
had the Right to confer Orders in it. In the time 
of St. Peter , and St. Paul-, Linus, and Gemens 
were Bifhops in the Church of Rome : And it is 
poffible, there might be others befides. But till 
the Death of St. Peter, ( fuppofing him to have 
been the proper Bifhop of that See) they were 
but his Coadjutors, or Titular Bifhops $ he being 
the Primate, and chief ReQor of it. Yet as he 
was likewife an Apoftle, who had a general Com- 
miffion to plant the Gofpel where ever the Divine 
Providence opened him a way ♦, it is likely, that 
his Subftitutes exercifed the Office of Bifhops at 
Rome , whilft he executed his Apoftlefhip elfe- 
where : As * Ruffinus, a Presbyter of Aquileia\ 
has very well obferved in the Preface of his Tran- 
flation of Clemens** Recognitions. The meaning 
of that is,. that St. Peter being obliged by his 
Apoftolical Funftion to leave Rome, to return to 
Pontus, Bitbynia, Babylon, &c. (whether this is 
true, or falfe, I inquire not here ) where he had 
before founded Churches ♦, and to maintain a good 
Order in them : He had committed to thofe Bi- 
fhops, during his abfence, the Ad miniftration of 
the Ecclefiaftical Affairs of that See. It is even 
highly probable, that he chofe one amongft them, 
according to the Cuftom of the other Apoftles, to 
fit in the Epifcopal Chair of Rome, as its Primate. 

* Ruff. Praef. in Clem. Recogn. Lib. 

4 Whether 

Episcopacy Ajferted. 149 

Whether it was Linus, or Clemens, is not materia! 
to my prefent purpofe. Yet it is in a manner un- 
queftionable, that it was Clemens. For befides the 
other Authorities out of *Tertullian, and thetA- 
poftolicai Conftitutions -, the Pontifical of Damafus 
is pofitive in it : Thefe are the very words in the 
Book} || Hie, i.e. Clemens ex precept o Eeati Petri 
fufcepit Ecclejiam. Whence it is plain, that the 
Epifcopal Chair of Rome was conferred on Clemens 
by St. Peter $ and that Clemens was at Rome in the 
Life- time of St. Peter. And indeed it was no more 
than was requifite in Reafon, and good Order ; 
that the Apoltles having no fix'd Station, but be- 
ing engaged by their Office to Preach the Gofpel 
throughout the World ; they fhould appoint fome 
one or other, in each principal Church they had 
planted, to be the ftanding Pallor, and Governor 
of it. What St. Peter did, as to the Church of 
Rome, by eftablifhing Clemens there, as its Bifhop. 
But if any one will have it, that Clemens had not 
the Pofleffion of the Epifcopal Chair of Rome, till 
after the Death of St. Peter •, the AfTertion will 
ftill remain good, viz. that St. Peter chofe Clemens 
in his Life-time to hold his place in that See, and 
to be at the Head of his Clergy, as himfelf had 
been. So that during St. Peter's abfence, Clemens, 
or Linus, will have governed the Church of 
Rome, as his Deputies : But after his Death, Cle- 
mens will have taken the Chair, by virtue of his 
Appointment-, Clemens ex pracepto, &c. Though 
it is moft probable, that after the Example of other 
Apoftles, St. Peter fettled Clemens Bifhop of Rome : 
And as for himfelf, that he exercifed his Office of 

* Supra Tertull. de Pra?fcr. Haer. cap. 32. 

f Supra Conft. Apoft. lib. 7. cap. 47. 

|| Anaft. Bibl. de Vic. Pone. Rom. Vic. Clem. 

L 3 Apcftl 

i$o The Divine Right of 

Apoftle, which was to Superintend all the Churches 
he had founded. 

Here is then St. Veter, who begins himfelf to 
difpofe of the Epifcopal Chair of Rome to Cle- 
mens ^ to the end after-Ages may learn thence, 
what was the Apoftolical Inftitution of Church- 
Government-, and (hould conform thereunto. And 
according to this, it is not improbable, (if we will 
not allow the Suppofition of two diftinft Congre- 
gations) that Clemens fucceeded Linus in it ^ then 
Cletus or Anacletus , Evareflus, Alexander, &c. 
Wherein however it is manifeft, that the Pattern 
of St. Peter was duly followed. How comes this 
about > Is it that there were no other Bifhops at 
Rome in their time ? Nothing of that : The con- 
trary is plain. For Linus is faid * to have Ordained 
eleven Bifhops, and eighteen Presbyters ^ Clemens 
fifteen Bifhops, ten Presbyters, and two Deacons •, 
Cletus thirty five Presbyters, by the Command of 
St. Peter h Anacletus fix Bifhops, five Presbyters, 
and three Deacons. But the true Reafon is, that 
amongft all thofe Bifhops, there was but one, 
who could be reckoned the Bifhop of that Church - y 
or perhaps the Metropolitan of that Province : 
And the other were Diocefan Bifhops, or Ckor- 
epifcopi^ if there were any at that time, which 
it is not likely •, or Coadjutors, or bare Titulars. 
The truth is, as to thefe laft, thole Seminaries, or 
Colleges of Bifhops ( if there were fuch, for it is 
not wholly agreed) might be then of good ufe in 
the Church : For they had therein an opportunity 
of being throughly inftrutted in the Apoftolical 
Doftrine, and Difcipline. So that when they were 
to be fent into other Chriftian Churches, they 
were fitly qualified to difcharge their Duty, and 

J Vic. Pont. Rom, & alii, with a little Viirirthn, 


Episcopacy Afferted. 151 

to keep up the Unity of the Spirit, in the Bond 
of Peace ; by preaching the fame Do£hine, and 
following the fame Difcipline, which they had 
heard, and feen. 

From what I have faid upon this Head, I think, 
I may fafely deduce the following Inferences, as 
being evident from thence : 1. That from the very 
beginning of Chriftianity, though there might be 
feveral Bifhops in one principal Church $ (I fpeak 
not here of thofe diftinQ: Congregations) yet the 
Epifcopal Chair was committed but to one, to 
Govern it in Chief. 2. That that one was called 
the Bifhop y Primate, and fometimes Angel of that 
Church. 3. That the Orders of Deacon, Presby- 
ter, and Bifhop, were then diftinguifh'd $ as ap- 
pears by the different Ordinations of Linus, Cle- 
mens, and their immediate Succeflbrs •, if we may- 
depend upon the Authorities produced. 4. That 
that Form, eftablifh'd in the beginning, was con- 
ftantly obferved afterwards ^ one Bifhop holding 
the See, tho' there might be more in the Church. 
5. That the proper Bufinefs of that Bifhop was 
to confer Orders, and govern the Flock committed 
to him. It was St. Peter, or St. Paul, that Or- 
dained Linus, and Clemens >, Linus did it to eleven 
Bifhops, Clemens to fifteen, Anacletus to fix, and 
they and Cletus to Presbyters, and Deacons, as I 
have related of each of them. What is not af- 
firmed of any others, whilft thefe held the Epif- 
copal Chair of Rome. The Reafon is, that the 
Government of that Church belonged to them irj 
chief j and that it was their part to execute the 
Conftitutions of it, whereof the Ordination of 
Minifters was one of the moll facred Articles, 
Otherwife it would have been lawful for the leaft 
amongft them, to admit into the holy Miniftry 
whom he pleafed. But as under the Law, none 
was permitted to touch the Confer ^ or even to 

L 4 uphql(| 

i$z the Divine Right of 

uphold the Ark, when it was tottering, as in the 
cafe otUzzah^ but he only that was duly there- 
unto called : So under the Gofpel, none can enter 
into any holy Office, but in the regular way, /. e, 
by the Epifcopal Conveyance •, which none can pre- 
tend to beftow, but he who has a Right to the Apo- 
files Chair. And as they a&ed thus in the Church 
of Rome, in the firft Age of Chriftianity -, fo did 
they likewife in that of Jerujalem : Which being 
accounted for in the preceding Chapter, and the 
appointing of St. James, and St. Simeon, the two 
Bimops within that Period h I prefume, I need fay 
no more here. From all which I conclude; that 
there was no Innovation made in the Ecclefiafticai 
Government, by the Biihops of the fecond Centu- 
ry, either at Rome, Jerufalem, or ejfewhere : But 
that they trod Religioufly in the Steps of the Apo- 
ftles, and their immediate SuccefTors, who were 
their Predeceffors 5 conforming themfelves punctu- 
ally to their Tradition, and Cufiom. I do not 
mean, that they added no Circumftantials : And 
that the Church beginning to feel fome Agitations 
within it felf, being grown a large Body, and re- 
quiring a more particular Management, to preferve 
its Purity, and keep it from falling into Diforder^ 
they made no pofitive Regulations, about things 
which were yet obferved but by Cuftom, and 
a Tradition from Father to Son. But a Cuftom 
confirmed by a Decree, and reduced into a pofitive 
Law -, is not an Innovation, or a change of Difci- 
pline : It is rather the ancient Tradition fortified 
by the Law • and an exa&er Confirmation of what 
was required to be done before. 


Episcopacy Afferted. 153 


Proofs of the TLftablijhment of Epifco- 
pacy by the Apojiles 3 in the other 
Churches • and that they had the fame 
Government with that afRome^ and 
Jerufaleir^ during the frji Century. 

BUT to take away all occafion of Cavil from 
our Adverfaries-, and that none may imagine, 
that it was only the Cuftom of the Church of Rome 
to have a Bifhop to govern it h whom St. Feter^ or 
St. Paul appointed firft ^ and who afterwards left 
his Place at his Death to another, with the fame 
Authority that he had : I (hall (hew now, that it 
was the general PraQice of the Chriftian Church, 
during the firft Century * there being then none, 
whereof we have any Monuments extant, but ufed 
it fo. This appears plainly enough, notwithftand* 
ing the Accounts we have of that Time, are but 
fhort •, and we have but few Contemporary Writers 
left us, to inform us of thefe Matters, and fet 
them in a full Light. How many things are we 
perfectly ignorant of, which fell out within that 
Period ? And how many Events , and particular 
Tranfa&ions, might we learn, if we had the Re- 
lations of what the Apoftles did amongft the 
Barbarians ^ how they governed the Churches 
they had planted there, and in the remoteft parts 
of the World-, and what Regulations they made 
for the well ordering of them : Whereof we know 
but little, or nothing 5 and that intermixed with 
Legends, and Fables ! So that I muft confine niy 


i$4 1h e Divine Right of 

felf of necefliy to thofe Churches, whereof we 
have fome Monuments left us. And thofe will be 
at prefent Antioch, ( befides Rome, and Jerufalem^ 
which I have already accounted for) Byzantium 
or Conftantinople, and Alexandria -, that we may fee 
the Proof of Epifcopacy in the five great Apofto- 
lical Churches : with fome others, which are men- 
tioned in Scripture, and the Succeffion of whofe 
Bifhops is recorded in Authentick Hiftory. 

To come then to a particular proof 
In Mtioch. of this, that the molt famous Church- 
es of the firft Age of Chriftianity had 
the fame Government with that of Rome, and Je- 
rufalem-, let us calt our Eyes firft upon the See 
of Antioch: For there the Faithful were firft called 
Cbriftians^ Affs xi. 26. This Church, as it is ge- 
nerally agreed, was founded by St. Peter, and 
St. Paul-, the former probably Preaching to the 
Jews, and the latter to the Gentiles, upon prudent 
Confiderations, and their being feparated on ac- 
count of their refpeftive Rites. For befides that 
St. Peter was in a peculiar manner the Apoftle of 
the Circumcifion, as St. Paul was of the Uncir- 
cumfion, where thofe People were intermix'd •, as 
appears from Gal. ii. 7. We find AGs xv. St. Peter 
disputing for the Jews of Antioch, and SuPaul for 
the Gentiles. But let that be as it will •, we read 
in Ecclefiaftical Hiftory, that Evodius was made 
Bifliop of that Church about the Year of drift 46. 
and that he held the Chair twenty three Years ; 
And likewife that Ignatius fucceeded him in the 
Year 69. It is true, that Ignatius was ordained 
Bifhop of that See before, in the Life-time of Evo- 
dius -, as we are afTured by St. Cbryfoflom, Tkeodo- 
ret, and others. Which things, I muft confefs, I 
know of no better way to reconcile, than by fay- 
ing, according to the Hypothefis of the two Learn- 
ed Men above-mentioned, That there were two 


Episcopacy Afferted. 155 

Divifions of Chriftians at Antiocb h one of the 
Jewifli, and the other of the Gentile-Converts: 
And that one Bifhop might be appointed by one 
Apoftle, and the other by the other. And this 
once for all, I muft extend here to other Inftances 
of the like nature, that there may be no need to 
repeat it again. For we cannot fuppofe, without 
deftroying the Unity of Epifcopacy, that there 
were two Bifhops in one and the fame Epifcopal 
Chair, at the fame time. However it is agreed 
on all hands, that after the Death of Evodius, Ig- 
natius held alone the See of Antiocb •, and that to 
about the Year of our Lord no. and the Tenth 
of Trajan's Reign •, Syria , and Synecius being 
Confuls the fecond time 5 when he fuffered Mar- 
tyrdom *. And he was not only Bifhop of that 
See^ but he got fo much Honour in it, that he was 
confidered as one of the greateft Lights of all the 
Churches in the Eaft. But here I muft advertife 
the Reader, that I follow Eufebius\ Chronology, 
as digefted by Dr. Cave in his Dypticba Apofto/ica, 
and Chronological Table ^ but where I have a par- 
ticular Reafon to the contrary ^ as the belt method 
I can take. 

The next Apoftolical Church,whofe g . 
Government is here to be inquired in- cmjUntinoplL 
to, is that of Byzantium or Con ft ant i- 
nople, founded by St. Andrew, This Apoftle, as 
we are informed by Nicepborus Calliftus ||, ( having 
Scythia, and the Neighbouring Countries alottei 
him, in the Diftribution which is fuppofed to have 
been made of the feveral Provinces of the World 
amongft the firft Preachers of Chriftianity, for the 
better and more orderly planting of it) in his 
Travels, converted to the Faith a confiderable Num- 

* Aft. Ignat. Wake's Apoft. Epift. Pratf. p. 71. Ann. Ii5. 
|) Niceph, Callift. Hifh Ecclef. lib. 2. cap. 39, 


, i$6 The Divine Right of 

ber of Men in that City, and ere&ed a Church at 
Argyropolis. And the fame Author tells us *, that 
he appointed Stachys the firft Bifhop thereof; 
whom Sr. Paul calls his beloved Stachys ; and that 
he held that See fixteen Years. But if this Au- 
thority is not thought fufficient *, Nicepborus Pa- 
triarch of Constantinople, who flourifh'd in the Year 
of Chrift 806. and who may be allow'd to know 
the Hiftory of his own Church, and the Succeffion 
of his Predeceflbrs, fays exprefly, t "That An- 
<c drew the Apoftie, when he Preached at Byzan- 
* tium, built an Oratory at Argyropolis, on the 
cc other fide the Water ; and ordained Bifhop of 
" that City Stachys, whom Paul mentions in his 
cc Epiftle to the Romans : And afiigns him the fame 
Term of holding that See. And doubtlefs fuch a 
Perfon is fpoken of by St. Paul, Rom.xv\. 9. Him 
fucceeded in that See Onejimus, who held fourteen 
Years 5 then Polycarpus, who held feventeen Years : 
Which brings the Succeffion of the Conjlantinopo- 
litan Bifliops towards the fecond Century, where 
it will be farther accounted for. 

If we confider the Church of A- 
'Alexandria. lexandria, which deferves well to be 
taken notice of here •, we (hall find, 
that St. Mark was the firft Founder, and Bifhop 
of it j|. I place it amongft the Apoftolical Churches $ 
becaufe, though he was not, ftriCHy fpeaking, an 
Apoftie -, yet being one at large, and Commiflioned 
by St. Peter \ whofe conftant Attendant he had been $ 
it is reckoned in the Number of them. He then 
appointed *Anianus, or acccording to fome, Ana- 
mas, to hold the Chair, the Eighth, or Tenth Year 

* Niceph. Callift. Hift. Ecclef. lib. 8. cap. 6. 
f Niceph. C. P. Chronogr. p. 412. 
H Eufeb. Hift. Eccl. lib. 2. cap. 16, 
3 Ibid. cap. 24.] 

Episcopacy Afferted. 157 

of the Emperor Nero, and of Chrift the 6^\ and 
he did it twenty two Years s * " He was, fays the 
Hiftorian, " a Man beloved of God, and admirable 
cc in all things. After him came t Avilius, in the 
Fourth Year of Domitian, and of Chrift 855 who 
governed that Church twelve, or thirteen Years. 
\Cerdo then, about the Firft Year of Trajan, who 
was Bifhop of it till the Year of Chrift 109. 
What ! was there but one Paftor in Alexandria at 
one time ? That can hardly be imagined : It was 
a confiderable Church ♦ and had doubtlefs a pro- 
portionable Clergy in it. But there was but one 
that bore the Title of Bifhop of it h becaufe he a- 
lone pofleffed the Epifcopal Chair of Alexandria, 
conformably to the Cuftom eftablifh'd by the 

As for the other Churches •, that ^«; 
of Athens, for the Situation of the 
City, and the great Concourfe of People reforting 
thither, upon the account of its being a famous 
Martplace, and having an Univerfity in it , could 
not but be one of the mod numerous, and flou- 
rifhing in Greece : And therefore St. Paul fettled 
the fame Order in it, as he had done in the others 
he had planted. And to that end he committed 
the Chair to Bionyfius the Areopagite, whom he 
had converted to the Faith -, as it is teftified by 
another Dionyfius Bifhop of Corinth, who flou- 
liftvd in the Year of Chrift 170. Which is record- 
ed by Eufebius*, Lib. 3. Cap. 4.. The fame Hifto- 
rian acquaints us b , Lib. 4. Cap. 23. that Dionyfius 
having fuffered Martrydom under Domitian the 
Emperor, as it is probably conjeQured c h he was fuc- 
ceeded in that See by Pub/ius, about the Year 90. 
inthe time of the fecond Perfecution. Which 

* Eufeb. Ibid. f Ibid. lib. 5. cap. 14. |j Ibid.c. 21.] 

a Ibid. lib. 3. c. 4. b Ibid. lib. 4. c, 13. 

J Caw Life of V'myJ. the Areop. brings 

i $8 The Divide Right of 

brings the Epifcopal Succellion towards the begin- 
ning of the Second Century. But we read of no 
other Bifhops of that Church in the Firft. 

I proceed therefore to the Church 
Corinth. of Corinth •, which was one of the 

firft planted, and which had the hap- 
pinefs to be inltru&ed, and governed by the Apo* 
ities, and feveral eminent Men, in its Infancy. 
But whether it was founded by St. Peter, or 
St. Paul -^ and whether Apollos, or another, was 
the firft Bifhop of it : And whether there were 
two Divifions of Converts in it ? I fhall not now 
inquire. This is but too plain concerning it, viz. 
That before the Government was fully eltablifhed 
in one Bifhop, it began to be miferably divided, 
one faying, I am of Paul; and another, of Apollo & -, 
and. another of Cephas -, and another, of Chrift^ as 
the Apoftle complains, i Cor. i. 12. In fhorr, it 
was torn to pieces within it feif ^ or rather, to 
fpeak more particularly, the Ring-leaders tore it to 
pieces with their Schifms, and Animofities : Cor- 
rupting the Chriftian Doctrine, and Difcipline^ and 
ufing all their Eloquence to gain Profelytes to their 
feveral Parties. To fupprefs therefore this Spirit 
of Ambition, and toreftrain thefe cruel Diflentions, 
which tended to the ruin of that Church ; it was 
at laft concluded, that the Ecclefiafticai Govern- 
ment of Corinth fhould be fettled in one, as the 
Bifhop of that See. In which fenfe that PaiTage 
of St. Jerom before-mentioned, In toto orbe decre- 
turn eft, &c. may very well be explained h though 
it is brought out upon every turn to prove, that 
Epifcopacy is not of Apoftolical Inftitution: Since 
it (hews the contrary ^ that Conftitution, according 
to him, having been made by the Apoftles them- 
felves^ and that left one fhould fay, I am of Paul-, 
end another y of Apollos-, and another, of Cephas-, and 
another, of Cbrijt. From that time the Church 


Episcopacy Averted. 1 52 

of Corinth had one Paftor eftablifh'd over it, to 
whom the care of it was committed, preferably 
to all others, as being the fole Bifhop of it. 
We do not meet in Ecclefiaftical Antiquity with 
the Names of the Bifhops, who governed that See 
during the firft Century. But we have no reafon 
to doubt, after the Apoftolical Eftablifhment, that 
the fame Order was continued in it. And feveral 
Paffages I have already quoted out of St.C/ement's 
firft Epiftle to the Corinthians, do evidently in> 
ply it. 

The fame thing I muft fay of the SwyrM% 
Church of Smyrna-, which ought not 
to be forgotten here ; no more than the other 
Afiatick Churches, which being chiefly planted by 
their Labours, were under the * Infpe&ion of 
St. John : Though I have had already occafion to 
fpeak of that of Ephefus, the chief Metropolis of 
them. In that Cburch then, the Apoftle having 
felefted Folycarp out of its Clergy-, appointed 
him, upon the Death ofBucoIus, to hold the Chair fj 
the firft Year of the Emperor Domitian, and of 
Chrift the 82 d ^ as he was very well worthy* 
This holy Man, as we are told ||, governed that 
See eighty fix Years, viz. to about the Year of 
our Lord 167. He, of all others, would not doubt- 
lefs have neglefted to oppofe any, if there had 
been fuch, that would have changed, about the 
middle of the fecond Century, (as is pretended) 
the Difcipline he had learned from the Apoftle, 
and feen him praftife. But what is moft obferva- 
ble here, is, that St. John is dire&ed by the Spirit 
to ftile him, and the other fix Bifhops of AJia he 
writes to, Rev. ii. 1, &c. Stars, and Angels-, and 

* Tertul. adv. Mar. lib. 4. cap. 5. 

f Iren. lib. 3. cap. 3. Eufeb. Hift. Eccl. lib. 4. cap. 14. 

|| Aft. Polyc. Waty* Apoft. Epift. Praf, p. 79. Ana. 147. 

4 that 

1 60 The Divine Right cf 

that Jefus Chfift is faid there, to bold, them in bis 
right band. Which certainly can amount to no \t% 
than an Approbation, and Confirmation of that Or- 
der of Minifters in the Church, and its Excellency. 
I prefume, it would be needlefs to inftance in 
the Churches of Philippi, Thejfalonica, and fome 
others, for more Proofs of this Matter. Neither 
will I fpend time in repeating the Relations of va- 
rious Legends, which tell us of a great number of 
Bifhops, who were fent during the firft Century 
into Italy, Spain^ France, and even England, to be 
the Directors of feveral Chriftian Churches, which 
had been already planted there : Becaufe their Te- 
ftimony is not authentick, being intermixed with 
palpable Fables. Yet it is not to be concluded 
thence, that there were no Bi(h ops. fent into fome 
parts of thofe Countries, and elfewhere, to fettle 
the Apoftollcai Succeffion in them, which was to 
be fpread throughout the whole World, by the 
Ordaining of Pattors to govern the Church •, though 
we have not the Names of them, for want of Me- 
moirs of thofe Times. Notwithftanding the fecond 
Century (hews fufficientiy, that there was Provifion 
made for the tirft $ fince we fee in the very begin- 
ning of it, aimoft every where, famous Churches 
ferved by a numerous Clergy, at the Head of whom 
appears a Bifhop^ who has the Adminiftration of 
Ecclefiaftical Affairs in chief. Which proves the 
Continuation of the Apoftolical Tradition in the 
fecond Century ^ as I (hall more explain in what 
is now to follow. 


Episcopacy JJfcrted. 1 6 1 


Wherein k proved^ that the Hierarchical 
Government continued the fame in the 
Second Century y as in the Firjl. 

TO make a full proof of this to my purpofe, 
purfuing my former Method, I (hall firft (hew 
in general, that the fame Form of Government was 
obferved in the Church of the fecond Century, as 
of the firft. And afterwards particularly, that the 
Diftin&ion of the three Degrees in the Mirtiftry 
was kept up during that Period. For if the 
Churches of the fecond Age have maintained the 
fame Polity, as thofe of the firft ^ and if in both 
the Epifcopal Order has been diftinguifli'd from the 
Presbyterial, and this from the Diaconal : Then 
it mult of necefiiry be owned, that fuch an Ad- 
mini ftration mult have been derived from the Apo- 
jftles. And like wife that far from making any In- 
novation in its CEconomy, as to the Subftance of 
it; the Chriftian Church of that time has but con- 
tinued the ancient, and firft Form •, and followed 
therein the Pattern of its Founders, in a fucceilive 
Imitation of them. 

And to begin wi th the Church of In the chmh 
Antiocb^ as 1 did before 5 and carry on f Anricch* 
the Epifcopal Succeffion through this 
Century in that See : Ignatius being dead, * Heron 
fucceeded him in the Chair 5 and held it to the 12 th 
Year of Adrian's Reign, which anfwers to the Year 
of Chrift 129. Immediately after him t Cornelius 

* Euleb. Hift, Eccl. lib. 3. cap. 3d. t Ibid. lib. 4. c. 20. 

M was 

1 62 the Divine Righto/ 

was appointed, in the fame manner as his Prede- 
ceffors had been ; and flood at the Head of that 
Church till the fifth Year of Antoninus Pius, or the 
I42 d of Chrift. Then Heron the Second of that 
Name, or rather Eros, till the Year 166, or 168, 
according to * Nicephorus of Conftantinople. Then 
the Learned Theophilus, in the Year of Chrift 168. 
whofe Books, ad Autolycum, are ftill extant. Af- 
ter him Maximinus, in the Year 180. And laftly, 
appeared the famous t Seraph, who began to go- 
vern the Epifcopal Chair of Antioch about the 
Year 189. So that we have here an uninterrupted 
SucceflTion of Bifhops in this See, throughout the 
whole fecond Century, conformable to that of the 
firft, the eftablifh'd Order continuing the fame. No- 
thing is here altered from what it was in the time 
of the Apoftles, as to the Subftance of it. Though 
there may be feverai Paftors at Antioch, one has 
the Chair after another committed to him, prefe- 
rably to the reft $ to be the Re£tor, and Moderator 
of it. And no Difpute arifes about it, at leaft 
that we know of. But as Ignatius fucceeded Evo- 
dius in the firft Century, fo does Cornelius fucceed 
Heron in the fecond, in the Church of Antioch $ 
and fo of the reft. If then the Elections of the 
fecond Age were not conformable to the Apofto- 
lical Eftabiifhment, thofe of the firft muft be con- 
trary to it: For there appears no difference be- 
tween them. It is true, this may be thought one, 
viz. that Evodius, and Ignatius feem to have been 
Bifhops together of the See of Antioch $ which de- 
ftroys the Superiority, which might obtain in the 
fecond Century, where there was but one Bifhop 
at one time $ and confequently Evodius, or Igna- 
tius, was but as a Prefident, who moderated be- 

* Niceph. C. P. Chrouogr. p. 417. 
t Eufcb; Hift. Ecelef. lib. 5. cap. ip. 


Episcopacy AJferted. 1 63 

tween his Equals, as it is precended. But befides 
what has already been faid upon this Point ^ I an- 
fwer, 1. That it does not appear, neither did I 
affirm ir, that Evodius, and Ignatius held jointly 
the Epifcopal Chair of Antioch, or at the fame 
time : That would dettroy the Unity of Epifco- 
pacy. It is true, they were Biftiops together ^ but 
in a different refpeft} as I have already explained 
ft in this, and in fome other Cafes. Evodiits was 
firft Bifhop of that See, and then Ignatius •, as we 
commonly reckon that Succeffion : " Remember, 
fays Ignatius himfelf, in his Epiftle to the Faithful 
of Antioch, (which, though falfly afcribed to him, 
is of good Antiquity) " the bUffed Evodius, your 
cc Pallor, who was after the A potties firft appoint- 
cc ed Bifhop over you. 2. The Church oxAntiocb 
being not lefs Populous in the fecond Century, 
than in the firft 5, and being more likely to have 
increafed in the number of Minifters : There is no 
ground to affirm, thac it had not more Paftors than 
one in it, though it had but one governing in chief. 
Heron, Cornelius, &c. are named, as thofe who 
kept up in that See the Apoftolical Succefiion. 
3. The Bifhops of that Church, in the fecond Age, 
had no other Order, nor no other Degree, than 
thofe in the firft : Each of them received the fame 
Epifcopal Ordination by the Impofnion of Hands, 
and thereby had the Government of that See com- 
mitted to him. Call him Prejident, or Moderator, 
or by what other Title you will ; I (hall always 
underftand him who was the Bifhop of thac Churchy 
and whofe Office it was to Govern ir, and confer 
holy Orders, by virtue of the Authority be had, 
and the Apoitolical Succefiion which refided in him. 
Upon which Principle, I muft affirm, that Serapip, 
towards the end of the fecond Century, received 
by his Ordination of Bifhop, no other Right, Au- 
thority, or Pre eminency, than Ignatius poiTeffed 

M 2 towards 

1 64 The Divine Right of 

towards the end of the firft. For my part, I can 
difcern here but the fame Order, and the fame 
Cuftom, which was obferved all along from the 

And therefore to make out the E- 
Of Byzantium pifbopal Line in the Church of By- 
nconfianmo. zantlum or Confiantinople throughout 
this Century, as I have endeavoured 
in the firft ^ referving rhofe of Jerufaletn, and Rome 
for the laft proof, that there was no Innovation 
attempted in the Apoftolical Government, either 
before or after the time pretended : I (hall take up 
the Succeflion here, where I left it off in that See. 
Polycarpus then being dead} Plutarcbus came into 
the Chair, which he held fixteen Years, acccording 
to the belt * Account we can get. To him fuc- 
ceeded Sedecio, who held it nine Years. Then 
Diogenes, who held it fifteen Years. It is true, that 
Nicepborus of Qonfiantinople, who is moft to be 
rely'd upon in this matter, does not mention thefe 
three laft Bifhops : But whoever confiders the va- 
rious Accidents which Books are fubjeft to, will 
eafily be farisfied with the Evidence that is left us. 
After Diogenes came t EJeutberius, who governed 
ihat Church feven Years. And he was fucceeded 
ia it by Fcelix, who governed it five Years. As 
this was by Po/ycarpus the fecond of that Name 
In that See, which he was Bifhop of feventeen 
Years, according to Nicepborus the Patriarch. And 
xhzn Athcnoclorus took it up, and held it four Years. 
This Man built a Church in EUa, which was af- 
terwards beautified, and enlarged by Conflantine 
the Great. Then came in Euzoius, who governed 
iixteen Years. And laftly, Laurentius in this Cen- 
tury, who held eleven Years. 

* Niceph. Callift. Hid. Ecclef. lib. 8. cap. 6. 
+ Nfccph, C. P. Chronogr. p. 412; 


Episcopacy AJferted. i £5 

The Church of Alexandria was 
no lefs uniform in this Point, than ^Alexandria* 
the other Apoftolical ones. For *Cer- 
do being dead, F rim us, or Friamus fucceeded to 
the Chair, and b held it ten Years. Then came 
c Juftus, or J -uftinus, in the third Year of Adrian $ 
who held it till about the thirteenth Year of that 
Reign. Then d Eumenes, or Hymemzus^ till the 
fixth Year of Antoninus Pius the Emperor : *Nice- 
phorus, C P. allows him but ten Years. After 
him f Mark the fecond of that Name, or Maraa- 
nus, who governed that Church thirteen Years, 
fays *Nicepborus \ but Eufebius ten. Then h Cela- 
dion did the fame, being Bifhop of that See ten 
Years, according to the Patriarch -, fourteen ac- 
cording to our Hiftorian. After him governed 
Agrippinus, till the Year i So. He had for his Suc- 
ceflbr * Julianus. To whom fucceeded * Demetrius 
about the Year 189. who governed that See forty 
three Years 5 pretty far into the third Century. 
Is there any thing changed here in the Form of 
the Government of the Church of Alexandria, from 
St. Mark to Demetrius ? Does not one Bifhop re- 
gularly fucceed another, by a due Ordination ? Let 
our Adverfaries tell me , under which of them 
the Difcipline was altered. Had one a Degree, 
which the other had not ? And did not the 
Church of Alexandria, in this Age, pra&ife pun- 
ctually the fame things, in refpecT: of the Go- 
vernment, which it had done in the preceding > 
The fame Order is obferved every where : And 
why } Becaufe no other is owned, or eftablifhed in 

* Eufeb. Hid Ecclef. lib. 4. cap. I. 
b Ibid. cap. 4. c Ibid. 

d Iren. Ibid. cap. 11. c Niceph.C. P. Chronogr. p. 4 id. 
f Iren. apud. Eufeb. Hid Eccl. lib. 4. cap. 11. g Ibid. 
h Eufeb. Hid Ecclef. lib. 4. cap. 19. £ Ibid. lib. 5. c. o» 

* Jbid. cap, 22. 

M 3 the 

166 The Divine Right of 

the Chriftian Church by tha Apoftles. And there- 
fore Sr. Jerom faid, as I intimated before, * "That 
" at Alexandria^ from Mark the Evangelift even 
c; xoUeraclas zn&D'wnyfius, the Presbyters always 
c; chufing one of themfelves, and placing him in 3 
" higher Degree, did call him the Bifhop. 

To go on with the Church of A- 
of Athens. thens ♦, though we have no account 
extant, how the Chair was fupplied 
immediately afcer the Death of Pub/ius, t who 
fufTered Martyrdom, probably under Trajan : Yet 
it is not to be doubted, but care was taken of it, 
unlefs fome extraordinary Accident hinder'd it. It 
can hardly be faid, that fuch a Church, as was that 
of Athens, was ferved by no Bifhops during a con- 
iiderable fpace of Years ^ though we read not their 
Names, and there might be a numerous Clergy in 
it. This is however certain, || that Quadrat us fuc- 
ceeded to the Epifcopal Chair in that See, under 
the Emperor Adrian^ about the Year of Chrift 119. 
This is that Quadratics, who coming into a Churchy 
which was almoft ruined by Perfecution, reftored 
it to its priftine Luften And that in fuch a man- 
ner, that obferving the Emperor to continue his 
Violence againft it- ? he took occafion, whilft Adri- 
an was at Athens^ to compofe an Apologetick in 
behalf of the Chriftians ^ wherein he (hewed their 
Innocency, and the great Injultice that was done 
them, in condemning them to Death 5 and had the 
Courage to prefent it himfelf to him. Eufebius^ 
± and Jerom aflure us, that that piece was worthy 
the Apoftoiical DoQrine. But unhappily for the 
the Chriftian World, that Apology is loft ^ as are 

* Hierom. Epift. ad Evagr. 

t Dionyf. Corinth, apud Eufeb. Hift. Ecclef. lib. 4. cap. 23, 

II Ibid. 

£ Eufeb. Hill. Eccl. lib. 4. cap. 3. Hieron. Car. de Script, 


Episcopacy Afferttd. x 6y 

feveral other Monuments of Antiquity, which 
would be of mighty ufe to us, to inform us of 
the State of the Church in the firft, and pureft 
Ages : But Time, which devours all things, has 
robbed us of them! However the Emperor was fo 
far affefted with it, that he abated much of his 
Fury againft the Chriftians. Such was the Zeal, 
Vigiiancy, and Occupation of thofe, who (our Ad- 
verfaries pretend) raifed Epifcopacy in the fecond 
Century to its pitch ^ and that by a Spirit of Ambi- 
tion, very contrary to the Humility of the Apoftles ! 
But who can believe, if he be not prejudiced before- 
hand ^ that Perfons, who were made a Spetlacle unto 
the Worlds and to Angels^ and to Men ♦, and were 
look'd upon as the Off-fcourwg of all things ^ fhouid 
dream of extending the Bounds of the Mtniftry ; 
as if their Founders had not left them a Field wide 
enough to cultivate ? Would not at leaft fome 
Lover of the ancient, and Fundamental Conftitu- 
tion ♦, fome good Difciple, and Religious Obferver 
of the Traditions of his Fathers * have ventured to 
write a few Lines againft fuch Innovators, to bring 
them back to the Law, and the Gofpel; and ta 
perplex them in their bold Enterprize ? But to re- 
turn to the Apoftolical SuccefTion in this See of 
Athens : ^jtadratus dying towards the end of A- 
drian's Reign, we may fuppofe the fame Form of 
Government continued $ fince * Origen^ who lived 
fome time after, extols this very Church for its 
good Order, Calmnefs, and Difpofition, beyond all 
their fecular Affemblies. , 

As for the Church of Corinth ^ of Cor ' 1J}t ^ 
though Antiquity has not left us the 
Names of the Bifhops, who governed that See to- 
wards the end of the firft, as we may fuppofe, and 
in the beginning of the fecond Century : Yet we 

* Orig. comr. Celf. lib. 3. p. 128. 

M 4 ijnd 

1 68 The Divine Rights/ 

find, that Yr'tmus about the middle of this held the 
Epifcopal Chair. For hegefippus * tells us, "That 
u in travelling to Rome, he faw him, and conversed 
" with him 5 and adds farther, "That that Church 
a continued in the true Faith. And t Dionyfius fuc- 
ceeded him in that See, about the Year of Chrift 
170. But not the Areopagite, who was Bifhop of 
Athens, as I have (hewn $ but the other called 
foionyfius of Corinth, who amongft others writ an 
ppiftle to the Athenians, wherein he fpeaks of the 
former. After this excellent Perfon, we meet with 
another, who came into his room, in the Year 196. 
|| It is the famous Bacchylus, who was had in fuch 
efteem in all the Churches of Greece, that by his 
Authority he fummon'd a Synod, to examine the 
Queftion about the Day whereon Eafter was to be 
kept •, which did then very much difturb the Peace 
of the Chriftian Church. This he could not have 
done, if he had not been look'd upon as the prin- 
cipal Director of the Churches of Achaia. And 
hereby, /'. e. by his Advancement into the Epifco- 
pal Chair, appears the Uniformity between Corinth, 
and the other Chriftian Churches in the fecond Cen- 
tury, as to the Point of the Ecclefiaftical Govern- 
ment, and the Apoftolical Succeffion. 

If we defire to have Examples of 
of Lyons in this nearer home^ we have but to 
France. turn our Eyes towards France, where 

we fhall meet with fome Churches in 
this Century, which were governed by Bifhops, as 
foon as they embraced the Chriftian Religion -, as 
namely Lyons, and Vienne upon the Rhone. It is 
true, it was but about the beginning of this Cen- 
tury, that Epifcopacy appears to have been fettled 
in thofe Churches^ becaufe we have no certain ac- 

* Hegef. apud Eufeb. Hift. Ecclef. lib. 4. cap. 22. 
t Ibid. cap. 23. || Ibid, lib, 5. cap. 22. 


Episcopacy Afferted. 1 69 

count, that the Gofpei paiTed into the Gauls be- 
fore that time $ or indeed into this Weftern pare 
of the World. But it is evident by the Proceed- 
ings of the Perfons, who were fent thither, what 
kind of Difcipline they had learned from their In- 
ftru£tors-, fince they adminiftred theEpilcopal Go- 
vernment there. For they formed a Clergy, efta- 
biiftfd Sees, and govern'd 'em rhemfelves in chief: 
They Ordained Minifters, exercifed Ecclefiaftical 
Jurifdiftion, and tranfafted rhe Affairs of their 
refpe&ive t locks. And one Bifhop fucceeded ano- 
ther in the Chair. Which is plain particularly in 
the Church of Lyons 5 whofe firft Bifhops in the 
fecond Century, are owned by all the Chriftian 
World. * The firft that came thither, was Potbi- 
nus^ who was a Difciple of Po/ycarp, and fuffered 
Martyrdom in the Year 177. This Man was then 
ninety Years of Age ^ fo that he might havq began 
to exercife his Paftoral Office pretty early in that 
Church, lrenaus was fent hither likewife ^ but it 
was in the quality of a Presbyter : For fo t Eufe- 
bius tells us exprefly 5 and eifewhere it is faid, 
that Potbinus had a Presbyter under him, who was 
probably lrenaus. But this is certain from the 
fame Ecclefiaftical || Kiftory, and others, that he 
fucceeded him after his Death in the Chair of 
Lyons, as Bifhop of that See, in the eighteenth 
Year of the Emperor Marcus Aurelius^ and that 
he held it about twenty three Years, viz. to the Year 
of Chrift 202. Which was that fatal Year, where- 
in Severus the Emperor almoft deftroyed that great 
City 5 wherein Iren&us had inftrufted, and govern- 
ed a noble Church, with much Pain, and no lefs 
Prudence. Irenaus then laboured with, and under 
Potbinus 5 but he did not come into his Chair, till 

* Vien. & Lugd. Eccl. Epift. apud Eufeb. Hift. Eccl. lib. 5. c.i. 
f Ibid. cap. 4. || Ibid, cap. 5, 


i jo The Divine Right of 

after his Death : That the Order eftablifh'd in the 
Chriftian Church from the beginning, fhould be 
Religioufly obferved, and the Unity of Epifcopacy 
maintained-, as they had feen it amongft their Pre- 
deceflbrs in the Faith. And indeed this good Man, 
who had been * brought up under St.Po/ycarp^ and 
who had his very Geftures in his Mind, and re- 
member'd the Things he difcours'd of, and even 
rhe Words he ufed\ as the Hiftorian tells us^ 
would not have violated the Apoftolical Govern- 
ment himfelf, if others had made any attempt that 
way. But Iren<eus (hewed himfelf a Bifhop t when 
he came to the Chair $ as appears from the man- 
ner', and Stile he with his Clergy writ in to Vittor 
Bifhop of Rome, about his having dared to Excom- 
municate the Bifhops of Afia, for refufing to fub- 
fcribe to his Judgment concerning the Celebration 
of Eafter>Day. For in that Letter he treats him 
but as his Equal, and fpeaks to him with an 
Epifcopal Authority. 

As to the Church of Vienne upon 
of Vknne up- the Rhone ^ which is faid to have been 
on the Rhfae. founded by Crefcens^ according to || A- 
do's Chronology, under the Reign of 
Nero : In the time of Trajan, and Adrian Emperors-, 
after the Death of Zacbarias, Martin a Difciple 
of the Apoftles, held the Epifcopal Chair in that 
City. To whom fucceeded Verus, who had been 
likewife an Auditor of the Apoftles ^ and then ano- 
ther, named Juftus, and Dionyfws ^ as the fame 
Author relates, who was Archbifbop of that See, 
and flouriflVd in the Year 859. X 

In fhort, what was pra£tifed in 
oljerufakm. thefe feveral Churches before men- 
tioned , in refpeft of the Epifcopal 
* " ,m »■* ' « '.i ^ .» » i 1 n — ~— » 11 

* Iren. Epift. ad Flor. Ibid. cap. 20. f Ibid, c. 24. 
I! Ado's Chron. Ml Sexta. * Cav. Hift. Lit. 

Succeffion : 

Episcopacy Afferted. 1 7 1 

Succeflion -, was univerfally obferved in all the 
others, which had learned the fame Difcipline from 
the Apdftles, and wererefolved to keep it inviola- 
ble. And though it is pretended by our Adverfa- 
ries, that an Innovation being made in this Point by 
Hyginus in the Church of Rome, about the middle 
of the fecond Century, that of Jerufalem followed 
the Example •, ( which I have (hewn to be wrong, 
according to their own account) it is very eafie to 
prove the contrary -, as I am now going particularly 
to do. The Jews then having held that Chair, as I 
have intimated, till the nineteenth Year of Adrians 
Reign, viz. for about an hundred Years, in a regu- 
lar Succeflion of thirteen Bifliops, befides St.James^ 
and Simeon, (whofe Names, according to * Eufe- 
bius, are Jujius, Zacchxus, Tobias, Benjamin, Jobn^ 
Matthias, Philip, Seneca, Jujius, Levi, Ephrem^ 
Jofeph, and Judas) there was care taken, that the 
Apoftolical Succeflion fhould not fail in that See, 
The Difafters that befel that Nation, one would 
think, might have changed the eftablifh'd Order, 
and kept them from making any more Bifliops of 
Jerufalem. But on the contrary, though their 
Jewifh Presbyters were in a manner extinfr, by the 
entire Deftru&ion of their City: Becaufe the Apo- 
ftolical Eftablifhment was Religioufly obferved in 
the Chriftian Church, and Epifcopacy was look'd 
upon as neceflary to its prefer vation ^ they chofe 
to have a Stranger for their Bifhop, one that was 
pot of their Extraction, rather than want one. And 
therefore Mark was appointed in that See, upon 
the Failure of the Jews , or for other Reafons -, 
though he was a Gentile by Birth ^ after the man- 
ner of his PredeceiTors, about the Year of Chriii 
136. that the Epifcopal Succeflion might be con- 
tinued at Jerufalem, which had had the Honour the 

I Eufeb. Hift. Ecclef. lib. 4. cap. 5. 


172 The Divine Right of 

firft to have an Apoftle for its Bifhop. Moreover 
that there might be no Interruption in it ^ as foon 
as this good Man had fufter'd Martyrdom, as it is 
fuppofed, being the ufual Lot of the Bifhops in 
thofe Days ^ Caffianus was put in his room ; And 
afterwards the others, till Narciffus inclusively ; 
who are named in the Catalogue which *Eufeb'ws 
has gathered of the Bifhops of Jerujalem h or in 
that fuller one of t Nicephorus of Conftantinople, 
with the Time of their holding. What Innovation 
was then made, or followed in the fecond Century, 
by the Church of Jerufalem ? What was there, and 
then done, as to the appointing of Bifhops, but 
what was in ufe before > Nothing, but continuing 
an Order, which was begun-, and imitating a Pat- 
rem, which the Apoftles themfelves had fet by their 
Jnftitution, and Practice. 
f The Church of Rome, againft which 

the great Out-cry is raifed, without 
diftinguifhing the Times ; and which is charged 
with having Innovated flrft •, was no lefs careful, 
than that of Jerufalem, and the reft, to maintain 
the Apoftolical Polity. For the Epifcopal Succef- 
fion was duly kept up there, as we have feen, from 
the very time of the Apoftles to Evareftus, viz, 
till the beginning of the fecond Century, wherein 
he fuffer'd Martyrdom ||, about the twelfth Year 
of Trajan's Reign ^ the %RomiJh Writers fay later. 
This Order was too well grounded, to be changed 
afterwards in that See : Rome will have ftill a Bi* 
(hop to govern it, after the Example of the firft 
Age. And therefore Evareftus was no fooner dead, 
(having a Ordained five Bifhops, fix Presbyters, 
and two Deacons) but h Alexander lucceeded him 

* Eufeb. Hift. Ecclef. lib. 5. cap. 12. 

f Niceph. C. P. Chrono^r. p. 409, 410. 

i| Eufeb. Hift. Ecclef. lib. 4. cap. 1. 

$ Plat, de Vir. Pont. Rom. Vic. Evar. * Ibid. 

6 Iren. apud Eufeb. Ibid. lib. 4. cap. 6. y§ 

Episcopacy Ajferted. 173 

in that Chair^ which he held ten Years ^ during 
which time he a Ordained rive Bifhops, Hvq Pre£ 
byters, and three Deacons. After hirn came 
Xiftus^ or Sixtus^ in the Year of Chrift 130. ac- 
cording to the Latins \ who governed that Church 
ten Years 5 and b Ordained four Bifhops, eleven 
Presbyters, and eleven Deacons. Then Telefpho* 
rus , who held that See eleven Years, according 
to Peiavius 7 and others 5 and c Ordained thirteen 
Bifhops, fifteen Presbyters, and eight Deacons. 
Then Uyginus , who likewife d Ordained fix Bi- 
fhops, fifteen Presbyters, and dve Deacons. This 
laft died in the Year of Chrift 156. having been 
in the Chair four Years, according to Fetavius's 
account^ fealing the Truth of the Gofpel, and of 
his Miniftry with his Blood, in the Reign of An- 
toninus. Then fucceeded Pius in that See, accord- 
ing to the Catalogues of Irenoeus^ and Uegefippus ^ 
but he was taken off by Martyrdom, though ir is 
not agreed in what Year of Chrift ^ after he had 
"Ordained ten Bifhops, nineteen Presbyters, and 
twenty one Deacons. After him came Anicetus 
into the Chair, who held it till rhe Year of Chrift 
173. (though thac is not agreed neither) in which 
he fuffer'd Martyrdom 5 after he had f Ordained in 
his Life- time, nine Bifhops, nineteen Presbyters, 
and four Deacons. Then Soter^ who g Ordained 
eleven Bifhops, eight Presbyters, and nine Deacons. 
Afterwards Eleutberius ^ who, it is faid, was the 
firft Bifhop of Rome, that died peaceably in his 
Bed 5 all his Predeceltbrs having luffered Martyr- 
dom. He departed this Life in the Year of Chrift 
192, according to the Romijh Writers-, after he 
had h Ordained fifteen Bifhops, twelve Presbyters. 

* Plat. Ibid. Vit. Alex. b Ibid. Vit. Sixt. 

c Ibid. Vit. Tel. d Ibid. Vit. Hyg. • Ibid. Vit. Pii. 

* Ibid, Vit. Anicet. 6 ibid. Vic. Sot. h Ibid. Vic. Eleuth 


1 74 The Divine Right of 

and eight Deacons. His Succeffor was Viftof- 
under * whom was that great Difference in the 
Church about the Celebration of Eafter- Day : And 
who held rhat See till the Year of Chrift 201. 
He t Ordained twelve Bifhops, four Presbyters, and 
feven Deacons. Laftly, came || Zephyrinus, who was 
the laft Bifhop of Rome in the fecond Century, or 
the firft in the third. And thus you have a per- 
petual courfe of Epifcopacy in this Church ^ which 
having fprung up in the time of St. Fcter, and 
St. Pau/'i ran through the firft, and fecond Centu- 
jy, without Alteration, and but little Intermiffion, 
A thing worthy our ferious Coniideratton, that the 
Epifcopal Succeflion was more {table in the Church, 
than the Truth of thofe Do&rines , which were 
look'd upon as immoveable : So deeply was that 
Order riveted in the Minds of the Chriftians I 
Which could not have been fo, if it had not been 
grounded upon the conftant Tradition, which was 
derived to them from the Apottles. 

This I take to be a fenfible Demon- 
Where'm no in* {Ration, that there was no Innovation 

SftS5& ™ de P the Churc ? of Rom i> f T 

churches. Adverfanes pretend, as to the tccle- 

fiaftical Government ^ nor as to the 
Diftin&ion of the Degree of Bifhop from that of 
Presbyter, during the fecond Century. For nothing 
was done therein, but exercifing the Order already 
eftablifh'd ^ maintaining an Uniformity in this Point 
with the other Chriftian Churches, which afted in 
the fame manner •, and conforming exaQly to the 
Tradition, and Praftice of the preceding Age. 
And therefore let it not be faid here any more, 
that the Church of Rome proceeded orherwife, than 
the others ^ and that it was the BilTiops of it, that 

* Eufeb. Hift. Ecelef. lib. 5. c. 22. f Plat. Ibid. Vic. Vift. 
|) Eufeb. lib. 6. cap. 21. 


Episcopacy AJferted. 175 

firft began the alteration in the Apoftolical Difci- 
pline, as to this part. For befides that no fuch 
change was made any where, as I think I have 
fully proved -, it decreed nothing about the Form 
of the Government, or the Adminiftration of the 
Church ^ but what was in ufe at Antioch, Jerufa- 
lent, Byzantium, Alexandria, Athens, Corinth ; and 
generally in all the Churches of Afia, Europe, and 
Africa. The other four great Apoftolical, and other 
Chriftian Churches, had their Primate, as well as 
that ofRom&s and in the appointing of a Succef- 
for, they obferved the fame Formalities. The Bi- 
fliops of Lyons, and Vienne upon the Rhone, had 
the fame Righr, Authority, and Pre-eminency, as 
he of Rome enjoyed. Each of them held the Go- 
vernment in chief within his Diftrift, Province, or 
Diocefe -, and had the Power of conferring Orders, 
and exercifing Church-Difcipline. The Epifcopal 
Chair belonged to each during his Life : And when 
he died, another fucceeded him in it -, and was in- 
vefted with the fame Dignity, and Authority. The 
Reafon whereof can be no other, than that all the 
Chriftian Churches of that time afted upon the 
fame unalterable Principle ^ viz. upon the Model 
which was left them by the Apoltles, and the 
Apoftolical Men of the firft Age. For if that Prin- 
ciple had not been fix'd, and conftant amongft 
them •, what likelihood is there, that they fhouid 
all agree in obferving the fame Difcipline > If any 
Innovation had been attempted to be made in the 
fecond Century -, would not fome one or other 
have oppofed fuch an Enterprize * And there be- 
ing fome of thofe Bifhops as yet living, who had 
been the Difciples, and Auditors of the Apoftles ; 
would not they have been offended, and at leaft 
declared againft thofe, who were for altering the 
Order eftabliftfd in the Chriftian Church ? And 
laftly, is it not a great Difgrace put upon the 


i j6 The Divine Right of 

pious Memory of all thofe holy Bifhops of the 
fecond Century, who were either ConfelTors, or 
died for the Name of Jefus Chrift •, to charge them 
witr! being Innovators, and having overthrown the 
Apoftolical Eftabiifhment, and that by a Spirit of 
Ambition ? Thefe things deferve the ferious Con- 
lideration of our Adverfaries ^ whatever they may 
think of it. 

But to have a more particular View 
But anexaB f t i )e Uniformity of the Church of 

f e Zd mty Rome in the & cond Century, with the 
rlrit^ let us again caft our Eyes upon 
the Form of its Government ; and we (hall meet 
with the fame Face in both. And to fet afide at 
prefent fome intricate Succefiions in the beginnings 
though it can hardly be doubted, that Linus was 
appointed by St. Faul^ and that after him came 
Cletus : St. Peter committed the Chair to Clemens* 
After his Dezxh^EvareJlus fucceeded him in it (as the 
Latins, and others would have it.) Then came into it 
Alexander, &c. St. Peter Ordained Clemens, and 
appointed him to hold that See ; without which 
he would have had no more Title to it, than ano- 
ther. And it was by a regular Ordination like- 
wife, that Alexander poiTelTed it after Evareftus : 
And then Xiftus, and Telefpborus. Clemens go- 
verned that Church, whilft he was at Rome : And 
fo did Uyginrn, till the Day of his Death. Though 
there might be feveral Presbyters, and even Bifhops 
in ir, in the Senfe I have explained ^ Clemens ap- 
peared at their Head 5 as the Primate of that See : 
So did likewife Evareftus, Alexander, Xiftus, and 
Telejphorus 5 and the reft, to the end of this Cen- 
tury. They iuceeded one another in the fame man- 
ner, and enjoy 'd the fame Authority 3 and performed 
the fame Office, to perpetuate the Miniftry in the 
Church. Can there be any thing more uniform, 
than the Order obferved by thofe holy Men ? 


Episcopacy Jfferted. i yy 

It will perhaps be ask'd here, To what end were 
fo many Ordinations of Bifhops, Presbyters, and 
Deacons made-, both at Rome, and doubtlefs elfe- 
where ? To which it may be anfwer'd 5 That the 
Gofpel being to be preached throughout the World, 
and Chriftlan Churches eftablifh'd amongft all Na- 
tions 5 befides the Occafions of the Churches al- 
ready gathered, and daily increafing : It was ne- 
ceflary, that thofe which had the Apoftolical Suc- 
ceflion in them, fhouid have Minifters of all forts 
ready, to fend them into feveral parts of Afia, Eu- 
rope, and Africa, to plant the Faith, to water and 
cultivate it, and to propagate it far and near. To 
this purpofe were Potbinus, and tren&us fent into 
Lyons 5 and probably Zacharias, and Martin into 
Vienne upon the Rhone : And fo others into other 
Places, and Countries; as Germany, Spain , the 
Gauls, and Britain it felf 5 though their Names are 
unknown to us at this Day, or not well agreed 
upon. And how many might be wanting inEgypr^ 
Numidia, Croatia^ upon the Danube, upon the Rbine$ 
and even amongft the Maures ! It is not to be 
doubted, but thofe excellent Servants of Jefus 
Chrift, who fat in the Apoftles Chair, were duly 
careful to provide for the Necefliries of the Chri- 
ftian Church in general. And therefore they had 
in readinefs, it is to be fuppofed, a competent 
Number of Bifhops, Presbyters, and Deacons, for 
the Work of the Miniftry. By which means the 
Banner of the Crofs was difplayed every- where, 
though not at the fame time in all places. Whence 
it comes to pafs, that fome Countries having re- 
ceived the Gofpel fooner than others -, and mod 
pretending to the coming of one of the Apoftles, or a 
Difciple of theirs, to convert them to the Chriftiart 
Faith -, there have been fuch Difputes amongft fe= 
vera! Churches concerning their Antiquity. 

N But 

178 The Divine Right of 

But when I averted, that the Right of Ordain- 
ing belonged to the Bifhops in their refpeftive 
Sees, I would be underftood in a due Senfe. And 
the more, becaufe to render that Power odious, 
fome have endeavoured to make it pafs for World- 
ly, and Tyrannical • as if it were a downright Usur- 
pation ; and a means to let into the Miniftry all 
forts of Men, according to the Humour of the Pre- 
late. But that is a meerlmpofition of theirs-, and 
a wrong Confequence drawn from trua Principles. 
For though the Right of Ordaining did belong to 
the Bifhop-, yet it was not free for him to admit 
whom he pleafed, according to his Fancy : At leaft 
after rhe Church had made particular Canons, and 
Regulations about it 5 befides the general Directions 
of the Apoftles. The Candidate for Orders, as I 
may call him, was to be examined ^ and found wor- 
thy, and capable of the Office, both for his Piety^ 
Wifdom, and Parts 5 he was to have the Character, 
and Approbation of the Church ^ and laftly, the 
Voice, and Confent of the Clergy gave no fmall 
weight to his Call. His Admiflion was not per- 
formed, before the Bifhop had taken the Advice 
of thofe, who fhared with him the care of the 
Flock : And then he proceeded to the Solemnity 
of Ordination , by the Icipofition of his Hands, 
with the aftiftance of his Presbyters. And no other 
had the Power to do that, without him-, becaufe 
it was his Prerogative, founded upon his Degree, 
the ApoKolical Succeflion, and good Order. Not- 
withftanding which, there was much Caution ufed, 
and many Formalities obferved, in admitting Men 
into the holy Miniftry, as I have faid : The Congre- 
gation was called together, to approve the Perfon ; 
and the Bifhop did not Ordain, without asking the 
Advice of his Clergy. And for a proof, that this 
was the PraQice of the Primitive Churchy we 
have but to read that Paffage of St. Cyprian , 


Episc6pacY Afferted. i j$ 

dire&ed to the Clergy, and People •, * In Ordina* 
lion'ibus Clericis, Fratres Cariffimi, folemus vos an- 
te confulere \ & mores, ac merita fingulorum com- 
muni confilio fonder are. 

From what has been faid upon this Head^ and 
the Parallel I have been making of the Churches of 
the fecond Century between themfelves, and thofe 
of the firft, from the time of the Apofties unto 
Trajan's •, I form this fhort Argument, for a furri- 
mary Anfwer to our Adverfaries. If all the Chri- 
ftian Churches, during the whole courfe of the fe- 
cond Century, have been ruled according to the 
fame Difcipiine-, and if that Difcipiine was the 
fame with that, which was eftablifh'd, and pra- 
cYis'd in the preceding Age : Then there has beer! 
no Innovation j nor no elTential Change made in 
their Government ^ then there has been an exact 
Uniformity in the EcclefMtical Adminiftration of 
the firft, and fecond Century , and the fame For- 
malities have been obferved in both, as to the In* 
ftitution of Men into the Miniftry-, the latter imi- 
tating the former, as its Pattern. But it is evi- 
dent by what I have related, and the Draught I 
have drawn of the Order of the Primitive Churchy 
in the whole extent of Chriftianity, which is known 
to US} that all the Chriftian Churches, during the 
whole courfe of the fecond Century, have beeri 
ruled according to the fame Difcipiine ^ and that: 
that Difcipiine was the fame with that, which 
was eftablifh'd, and pra&is'd in the preceding Age. 
Whence it neceffariiy follows, that there has beeri 
no Innovation made ^ but an exact Uniformity ob- 
ferved, as to the Government of the Church hy 
Bifhops, both before, in, and after Hygimts's time, 
to the end of the fecond Age of Chiiitianity. 

* Cyprian. Epift. 38, 

tt 2 C H A £ 

1 80 The D i v i n e R i g h t 0/ 


Wherein is proved, that the DiJiinStion 
of the Degrees in the Minijiry conti* 
mied the fame in the fecond Century y 
as in the jirft. 

HAving thus reprefented in general the Form of 
the Government of the Church in the fecond 
Century ^ I am now to proceed to a particular proof 
of the Di ft i notion of the Degrees in the Miniftry-,and 
to (hew that it continued the fame then, as in the 
firft. It is true, that ftriftly, or rather according 
to the juft Rules of Difputing^ it lies upon thofe 
that deny this, to prove that it was not fo in the 
beginning, or to mark the time when it began to 
be otherwife. For fince I have produced general 
Authorities, which declare that plainly to have been 
the Difcipline of the Church in the firft Age-, and 
likewife given an account of the diftincl: Ordina- 
tions of Minifters in the See of Rome then, con- 
formably with the Practice of other Chriftian 
Churches. And' fince I have done the fame, in 
fome meafure, in the fecond ; I think, I am fairly 
in pofleflion of the DiftinQion of the three De- 
grees in the Miniftry /, and that it belongs to our 
Adverfaries to fhew the contrary. But not to deal 
fo rigorouily with them •, 1 (hall go on here to 
prove by particular Inftances, with proper Tefti- 
monieS} that the three Orders of Bifhops, Pref- 
byters, and Deacons, were continued in the fecond 
Century, as in the firft. Wherein, I prefume, it is 
not expected, that I fhould exhibit particular Lifts 
of all the Ordinations that were made in the Chri- 

Episcopacy Ajferted. 1 8 1 

ftian Church during that Period- that would be 
both a tedious, and an unneceflary Work, in a mat- 
ter of Faft, which is not fo much denied, as pre- 
tended to be an Innovation : And therefore I mail 
content my fel£ for Method's fake, to inftance in 
fome Examples, which are belt attefted, and molt 

If the few Monuments which are left us of the 
Ecclefiaftical Hiftory of the firft Age, did not fet 
this Matter in a full Light for that time-, which 
however the Divine Providence has provided for, 
as we have already feen : The conftant Practice of 
the Chriftian Church in the beginning of the fe- 
cond Century, would be a great Prefumption in be- 
half of it. For if there was then a Diftin&ion 
made in the Degrees of the Miniftry, it was fo 
done, becaufe the feveral Churches had fo received 
it : It being morally certain, that if there had not 
been a Rule, or a Cuftom eftablifh'd, there could 
not have been amongft them all fuch an Agree- 
ment, and fuch an Uniformity in the Form of the 
Government. Howotherwife would the Churches 
of Afia, Europe^ and Africa ^ between which the 
Diftance fcarce admitted of any Correfpondence j 
have unanimoufly concurred in changing all on a 
fudden, fo eiTential a Point of the Ecclefiaftical 
Difcipline ? I mull therefore now proceed to the 
fecond Age of the Chriltian Churchy wherein I 
am to (hew, by particular Inltances, that purfuant 
to the Practice of the firft Century, the Orders 
of Bifhops, Presbyters, and Deacons, were diftin- 

Our Adverfanes pretending, that the Innovation 
was firft made in the Church of Rome in this Cen- 
tury § whofe Example, they fay, that of Jerufa- 
lem, and the others followed afterwards : If I had 
but the feveral Ordinations, which the Bifhops of 
that See made, during that Age, conformably to 

N 3 the 

182 the Divine Right of 

the Cuftom of thofe of the preceding •, it would 
be, I think., a convincing Proof of the Fa£t. For 
there has not been one of thofe Bifhops, but has 
Ordained fome to be Deacons, others Presbyters, 
and others Bifhops h as we have taken notice of 
before. Whereof we have an account in the Liber 
Tontificalii of Damafus, though more probably of 
Anaftafius, or whoever was the Compiler of it ^ 
and in Flatinas Lives of the Popes •, which give 
ps an account of thofe various Ordinations : One 
Primate having fometimes Confecrated fifteen Bi- 
ihops, another nineteen Presbyters, and another 
twenty one Deacons. And if fo, what alteration 
have they made in the Practice of their Predecef- 
fors, who did the fame thing •, and taught them to 
do fo by their Example > 

But to proceed in this matter, according to my 
propofed method, by particular Authorities, and 
Inflances : Juftin Martyr % who flourifh'd about 
the middle of this Century, giving an account in 
his fecond Apology for the Chriftians, of the man- 
ner of their holding their Religious Affemblies, 
and celebrating the Holy Eucharift 5 makes mention 
of the ri^s^caV, Antiftes, or Prefidcnt ^ who could 
be no other than the Bifhop of the Church ^ and 
of the Deacons : And relates what part each of 
them performed upon thofe Occafions. liege ftp- 
pis, who was his Contemporary, tells usf amongft 
other things, in what remains to us of his Wri- 
tings in Eujehuis; that Eleutherius was Amcetus\ 
Deacon, and that he fucceeded Soter in the See of 
Rome. Nicepborus Calliflus fays exprefly||, that 
another Eleutber ius was Ordained Deacon at fifteen, 
presbyter at eighteen, and Bifhop of lllyr'uum at 

* Juft. Marc Apol. 2. pro Chriftian. fub finem. 
f Hegef. apud Eufeb. Hi ft. Ecclef. lib. 4. cap. 23. 
I Niccph. Call, Hift, Ecclef, lib. 3. cap. 2$. 


Episcopacy AJferted. 183 

twenty Years of Age. If his Teftimony is true, 
one can hardly fpeak more diftinctly of the thrse 
Orders in the Miniftry. But if there were any 
ground to doubt of it^ our Adverfaries will not 
deny that of ""the Faithful of Viennc^ a and Lyons- y 
who obferve that Diftin£tion: Nor that of SuHie- 
torn b . And he fuppofes it in his Argument, in his 
Letter xoEvagrius^ viz. that from the time of St. 
Mark^ who was the firtt conftituted Bifhop of Alex- 
andria by the Apoftles, to Her ac las, and Dionyfius^ 
there were thofe three Degrees of Minifters in that 
Church 5 and that no others were owned there, as 
of Apoftolical Inftirution. I may not omit here 
that PaiTage of Irenaus^ becaufe he lived within 
this Period, concerning the Apoftolical Appoint- 
ment of Bifhops, which he plainly affirms there $ 
" c The Tradition of the Apoftles, fays be, is evi- 
cc dent in every Church to thofe who defire to 
" know the Truth : For we can produce thofe 
u who were ordained Bifhops by the Apoftles, and 
" their SucceiTors to our own time, who neither 
" taught nor knew any fuch thing : With others 
to the fame purpofe t. Nor that of Hegejjppus^ 
c That the true Faith remained in all the other 
Succeflions of Bifhops, and all the other Cities ^ 
and that the Herefies arofe by departing from 

Now to come to very particular, and remarka- 
ble Inftances in this Century $ the Interview be- 
tween St. Polycarp Bifhop of Smyrna^ and Anice- 
tus Bifhop of Rome , is a matter of Facl well known 
in Hiftory, and particularly attefted by Irenaus f in 
Eufebius. This Man relates, that Polycarp went 

* Vien. & Lugd. Eccl. Epift. apud Eufeb. Hift. Eccl. !. 5. c. 1. 

b Hieron. Epift. ad Evagr. 

- Ircn. adv. Ha?r. lib. 5. c. 3. d Ibid. 1. 4. c. $3, 1. 5. c. 20. 

6 Hegef. apud Eufeb. Hift. Eccl. lib. 4. c. 22. 

£ Iren. apud Eufeb. Eccl, Hift. lib. 4. c. 14. 

N 4 from 

1 84 Tfoe Divine Right of 

from Afia to R0/0£, (doubtlefs not of his own Zeal 
for the Peace of the Catholick Church, or as de- 
puted by his Afiatick Brethren) to confer with Ani- 
cetus^ upon the occafion of the Qitarto-deciman Con- 
troverfie, which was then on foot between the 
Eaftern and Weftern Churches, and began to per- 
plex them very much. They did not agree upon 
that Point, it feemeth. But yet Ariicetus^ not- 
withftanding their Difagreement in Opinion, as to 
this, and fome other matters ; out of a Principle of 
Civility, Union, and Concord, * allowed Polycarp 
to Officiate in his Church •, and even, out of refpeft 
to him, to confectate the Sacrament there in his 
prefence. What can be concluded hence, but this ^ 
that the Chair, and Ecclefiaftical Government of 
Rome did belong to him < For if all the other Mi- 
rrifters of that Church had been equal to him in 
Dignity, Irenxus would not have exprefs'd him- 
felf ib} but would rather have faid, that notwith- 
standing that Difpute, the whole Body of the 
Clergy met, to deliberate amongft themfelves, whe- 
ther they fhould give Poly carp' leave to adminifter 
the Sacrament in their Church ? And that they all 
confented to ir. To (hew therefore that Anicetus 
poffeffed a fuperior Degree to his Presbyters, and 
the reft ^ and that the Government of that See was 
placed in him, as the Bilhop thereof^ Irenxus tells 
us, that it was he. that allowed, or gave Polycarp 
leave to Officiate in his Church. If this Proceed- 
ing of his does not demonffrate a peculiar Right 
in him, and his Superiority above his Clergy, (iup- 
pofing he had one *, which, I prefume, is not here 
doubted of-,) then I am at a lofs, what to ground 
any Judgment upon. The Letter Po/ycratcs Bifnop 
of Ephefus writ to Vi&or Btfhop of Rome t, which 

f Iren. Epift. ad Vift. apud Euftb. Hift. Eccl. lib. 5. cap. 24. 
t Ibid, Polyc** Epifl. ad Via. 


Episcopacy Afferted. 185 

is found likewife there in Eufebiix , to let him 
know the Senfe of the Bifhops of Afia concerning 
the Day on which Eafler was to be celebrated ^ is 
another Fa£r. to my prefent purpofe. There he 
reckons up by Name feveral Paftors, who had had 
the Government of Churches within the Province 
of Afia-, and fpecifies them by their Dignity, viz. 
Fo/ycarp Bifhop of Smyrna, Thrafeas Bifhop of 
Eumenia, Sagark Bifhop of Laodicea, Papirius pro- 
bably another Bifhop, Mel'ito Bifhop of Sardis^ 
befides feven of his Relations and Kinfmen alfo 
Bifhops -, amongft whom, he fays, he made the 
eighth. And why does he add this Quality to 
their Names, think we ? but certainly to diftin- 
guifh them from the reft of the Clergy, who were 
not of the Epifcopal Order. And fince I am upon 
Vittor, and the great Debate which broke out in 
his time into an open Breach, about the keeping 
of Eafler-Day-, I will relate one Fact more, which 
may put this Point out of difpute, being full up- 
on it. The Bi(hops of Rome then, his Predecef- 
fors, having not been able, by all their Exhorta- 
tions, and Arguments, to bring over thofe of Afia 
to their Judgment 5 and to perfuade them to cele- 
brate the Feaft of Eafler upon the next Sunday 
after the Full Moon of March ^ (each pretending 
Apoftolical Tradition for their Ufage :) It is inti- 
mated* by the Hiftorian, that V'rflor fummon'd a 
Synod $ that an Epiftle f was written to the Roman 
Church, to which his Name was prefix'd •, and that 
he || Excommunicated the Bifhops of Afia, his Bre- 
thren. There was therefore a Clergy in the See of 
Rome $ and he, as their Primate, fummon'd a Sy- 
nod of them j that being part of his Right, and 
Prerogative, which the others could not exercife 

* Eufeb. Hift. Ecclcf. lib. 5. cap, 23. f Ibid. 
|| Ibid, cap. 24. 


i86 The Divine RiGHf of 

without him, or without his Authority. He muft 
be Blind , that does not fee in the fummoning 
of this Synod, the Infcription of that Epiftle in his 
Name, and the Excommunication he decreed ^ that 
the other Pallors were not Equal to ViSor. It is 
true, he abufed his Power, in that he took upon 
him to Excommunicate the Bifhops of Afia, be- 
caufe they would not comply with him.' But the 
Abufe of a thing does not deftroy its lawful life ; 
nor do even fome a£b of Tyranny, and Male- 
adminiftration , abolifh Order, and the Right of 
Government. On the contrary, they affirm it •, fince 
they are founded upon it, and that without them it 
would not be Male-adminiftration, and Tyranny ^ 
which are nothing elfe but the a&ing contrary to 
the Order, and Right eftablifh'd. Vitior abufed 
his Eminency in that Church, that is all that can 
be faid : But he could not have done it, if he had 
not been pofleffed of it. 

But to confirm this Point farther, and to give 
other Inftances in other Churches: Dionyjius Bi- 
fhop of Corinth, as appears from his Epifties, * ab- 
ftra&ed by Eufebius $ was no Stranger to the Di- 
ftinQion of the Degrees in the Miniftry. For in 
that to the Athenians, or the Faithful of Athens ^ 
he not only makes mention of Pub/ius, and §>ua- 
dratus, their Bifhops ^ but t attributes their De- 
fection from the Faith to the Death of the one, 
and their Recovery to the Coming-in of the other. 
And writing || to the Churches of Crete or Candia, 
which were at that time very numerous-, he migh- 
tily commends their Bifhop Philip, to whofe Care 
they were committed. There were certainly other 
Clergymen in .that Iiland, wherein St. Titus had 
taken fo much pains to fettle the Gofpel : Yet he 

* Dionyf. Epift. apud. Eufeb. Hift. Eccl. lib. 4. cap. 23. 
f Ibid, ad Athen. || Ad Gortyn. &c 

6 particularly 

Episcopacy Afferted. 1 87 

particularly mentions but one as their Bfhop^ 
which (hews pretty well the Diftin&ion between' 
them. In his Letter * to the Churches of Pontus^ 
he takes likewife particular notice of their Bifhop 
P almas by Name. In that he writ t to the Gnof- 
fians, he exhorts their Biihop Pinytus, not to lay 
the Yoak of Celibacy upon his Clergy ^ which in- 
timates plainly his Superiority over his Presbyters, 
and Deacons h and his Diftinftion from them. For 
if he had had no Authority over them, it would 
not have been neceffary for Dionyjtus to exhort him, 
not to injoyn them Celibacy. They would have 
flighted his Injunftion $ and told him, he might 
continue a Virgin, if he pleafed^ but as for them, 
that it was free for them to Marry. The ground 
of his Writing then was, that the Bifhop of Gnof- 
fus having the chief Government of his Clergy in 
his hands, he abufed his Power 5 and would rafli- 
ly impofe Laws upon them, which were contrary 
to their Evangelical Liberty, and did not belong 
to @ his Station. Now I am upon Dwnyjius y s Epi- 
ftles «, ^uadratus fucceeded Publius, after his Mar- 
tyrdom, in the See of Athens ^ as I have obferved 
before out of that Author 5 and confequently he 
was Bifhop of that Church in the time of Adrian. 
And yet Eufebius, ^and Jerom make him a Difci- 
ple of the Apoftles ^ and affure us, that he came in 
fome time after his Predeceffor. Which may very 
well be, according to the Principles I go upon. For 
Quadratus was then an ancient Man, j. e. when he 
fucceeded Publius in the See of Athens -, and he 
might have been admitted into the Miniftry by the 
Apoftles, or at leaft have been a Difciple of theirs : 
Probably he was at firft a Deacon, or Presbyter in 

* Ad Amaftr. &c. f Ad GnoflT. 

t Eufeb. Hift. Ecckf. lib. 3. cap. 37. Hieron. de Script, in 
(£uadr 9 


i8# The Divine Right of 

that Church, or perhaps a Coadjutor, or Titular 
Bifhop. But he was not inftalled Bifhop of A- 
zbens, nor own'd for the Antiftes, till a long while 
after, /. e. till after the Death of Publius -, as Dio- 
nyfius of Corinth, and Eufebius himfelf inform us. 
The Bifhop then was at that time diftinguifh'd 
from the Presbyter, and even from the Coadjutor, 
as to his Pre-eminency : And that the Presbyter 
might be promoted to the Epifcopal Chair, there 
was need of a new Ordination, or Confecration. 
I (hall add to this, what Eufebius tells us, after 
he had named fome of the moft eminent Bifhops 
in Commodus's time :, * " That befides them there 
J were innumerable others, as it may be believed, 
<c who fiourifhed in thofe Days. 

I have drawn up a Catalogue before of the feveral 
Bifhops, who fuccefTiveiy governed the Church of 
Alexandria, from the Apoftles time to Demetrius, 
who was the laft that held that See in the fecond 
Century, and pretty far in the third-, during whofe 
iidminiftration we meet with fome Inftances re- 
lating to the Matter in hand. The firft is of Fan- 
tcmus, which is very remarkable, t This Learned 
Man, by his great Talents, had fet up, or rather 
continued in that City, a fiourifhing School, where- 
in he publickiy taught Divinity, as a Catechift, or 
Profeffor of Theology. And as Alexandria was 
% famous in the World, the Indians who had re- 
ceived the Gofpel by the Preaching of the Apoftles, 
or thofe appointed by them ; applied themfelves 
to Demetrius, and defired him to fend amongft 
them fome able Chriftian, to confirm, and inftrucT: 
their Nation in the Faith. The Bifhop thought he 
could not chufe a fitter Perfon than Panttnus. And 
therefore fent him into thofe Eaftern Countries ; 

* Eufeb. Hift. Ecclef. lib. $. cap. 22, 
i Hieron. de Script, 


f Ibid. cap. 10. 


Episcopacy AJferted. 1 89 

tvhere,by the Blefling of God, he much edified the 
People, and did great Service to Religion, whilft he 
lived there. From which account I infer, that Pan- 
tanus was probably a Presbyter, or at leaft a Dea- 
con of the Church of Alexandria, when he taught 
Divinity there in the publick School h fince Deme- 
trius took him out thence, to go and preach the 
Gofpel to the Indians $ or that if he was nor, he 
Ordained him, before he fent him away. Eufe- 
bins fays exprefly, * " That he was Preacher of the 
" Gofpel of Chrift to the Eaftern Nations : And 
reckons him amongft the Evangelilts of that time* 
For now if Demetrius had not enjoyed a fuperior 
Degree, Yam anus might have gone of himfelf, 
without any application made to the Bifhop : And 
the Indians wanting fuch a Man, upon Information 
of it, he would have faid, I think it proper for me 
to go and exercife my Faculty amongft them, and 
I want no Million. But he could not go, and an- 
fwer their Requeft, unlefs he was in Orders : For 
none can take upon him an holy Office of himfelf ^ 
nor even go, unlefs he is fent, and Commiflionated 
thereunto by his Superior. What farther verifies, 
that he was but a fingle Presbyter, or Deacon, is 5 
t that being full of Days, and Labours ^ he returned 
to Alexandria, to die in his, own Country ^ where 
we do not find by Hiftory, that he held any other 
Station in that Church, than that he had before. 
If he had been Bifhop of it, that would not have 
been omitted. On the contrary, it appears, who 
fucceeded Demetrius in the See of Alexandria - y not 
V ant anus, but Heraclss. There was therefore then 
a DiftinQion of Degrees in the Miniftry •, Deme- 
trius was a Bilhop, and ~P ant anus a Presbyter, or 
one ftep lower. This is evident || likewife* in the 

* Eufeb. Hift. Ecclcf. lib. $. cap. 10. f Ibid. 

|| Ibid. lib. 6. cap. <5., 

6 Cafe 

ipo The Divine Right of 

Cafe of Clemens Alexandrinus, Panttenus's Succefr 
for in thit famous School ^ who though he was 
endued with great Gifts, was called by Providence 
to be but a Presbyter of Alexandria* \ And never 
was raifed to the Epifcopai Dignity, no more than 
his PredeceiTor, or his Succeffor Origen. However 
he exprefly owns t the three Degrees in the Mini- 
ftry. And it is he tells us amongft others, || that 
James the Jufi was conftituted Biihop of Jerufa- 
lem by the Apoftles, as we have taken notice be- 
fore ^ viz. inafmuch as he was appointed by them 
Bifhop of that City, where they ordinarily reforted, 
as being the Center of theChriftian Religion-, till in 
procefs of time they were obliged to leave it, to go 
and preach throughout the World amongft the Gen- 
tiles, even to the remoteft Nations, the Gofpel which 
the Jews rejeQed. However there always refided in 
it, during the Stay of the Apoftles, this proper Bi- 
ihop, one of their Collegues. And even after the 
Romans under Titus had taken, and deftroyed that 
miferable City :(:, according to Eufehius's Compu- 
tation ^ fome of them met there, to chufe Simeon, 
isnd fettle him in the place of Si. James : So dear 
was the Salvation of their Country to them ! I 
muft not feparate Origen from his two PredeceiTors 
in the School of Alexandria, though he flourifhed 
moft in the third Century, to which we are not 
yet come: And therefore referving his Do&rine 
concerning this Subject for that Period, I (hall on- 
ly mention here his Cafe as a Presbyter, which 
makes for my prefent purpofe. Origen then ha- 
ving acquired much Reputation at Alexandria, he 
took a Journey to Cefarea in Paleftine -, where he 

* Ibid. cap. ii. Alex.Epift. ad Ancioch. 

t Clem. Alex. Strom, lib. 6. p. 667. Ibid. lib. 7. p. 700. 

|j Ibid, apud Eufeb. Hitt. Ecclef. lib. 2. cap. t. 

i Eufeb. Hid. Ecclef. lib. 3. cap. 11. 


Episcopacy Ajferted. 19 1 

grew into fuch Efteem with the Bifhop of that 
place, wAoSJerufalem, that they thought fit to 
confer on him the Order of the Presby terat *. This 
being known to Demetrius Bifhop of Alexandria, 
who in the bottom of his Heart valued his Merit 
at firft no lefs than they ^ it fell out afterwards, 
that he became angry at his Perfon, hy an envious 
Difpoiition natural to Man, which cannot brook 
the fplendor of another's Talents. Whereupon he 
writ to the two Bifhops, who were concerned in 
his Ordination ^ and blamed their CoruhicT: in ad- 
mitting him to be a Presbyter. And to juftifie his 
cenfuring their Aftion, he informed them of a 
thing, which he faid, he had kept thitherto as a 
Secret : Which was, that Origen being young, and 
taking thofe Words of our Saviour literally, Mattb. 
xix.T2. Some have made tbemj elves Eunuchs for the 
Kingdom of Heaven's fake : (Or rather, that being 
obliged at that time to be much with Women, 
whom he infirufted •, to prevent Temptation) he 
had Caftrated himfelf. Let this be as it wilt-, it is 
evident, from this Relation, that Origen was a 
Presbyter, and not a Bifhop as Demetrius : And 
that fince he received his Presby terat from thofe 
of Jerufalem^ and Cefarea^ theirs was a fuperior 
Degree to his. In all which Authorities, and Ex- 
amples, whereof I have alledged a good number ^ 
we may clearly fee the Form of the Ecclefiaftical 
Government throughout the fecond Century, the 
Subordination in the Miniftry, and the Diftin£tion 
between the Bifhop, Presbyter, and Deacon : So 
that I think, I need not enlarge any more upon it 

* Eufcb. Hift. Ecclef, Jib. 6. cap. 8a 

C H A p; 

i^2 The Divine Right of 


Wherein is proved, that the Hierarchical 
Government continued the fame in the 
third Century, as in the firjl, and fe- 

IAm come now to the third and laft Century, 
which I propofed to my felf to confider •, where- 
in, according to the Method I intended to purfue, 
I mult examine, whether throughout this Period 
to the Council of Nice, which was held about the 
beginning of the fourth Age, the Church had the 
fame Form of Government, as in the two pre- 
ceding > For after that famous Council, there is 
no Obftinacy can make us doubt, that the Chri- 
flian Church was univerfally governed by an Epif- 
copal Hierarchy, till the laft Agefave one$ wherein 
our Fathers found themfelves obliged to Reform 
the Church, which had corrupted the Doctrine of 
Religion-, and changed Epifcopacy into Tyranny, 
by fetting up a Pope, who Lorded it over the Con- 
fciences of Men, and the Authority of Princes. 
Which makes the Epifcopai Government appear 
odious at this Day to feveral Churches, and States, 
which have caft off the intolerable Yoak of the 
Romany not confidering that it was not the Form 
of the Government, but the Corruption of it, that 
was to be redreffed. This was Judicially obferved 
in this part of the Kingdom of Great Britain, 
whilft they fell elfewhere into the other Extreme, 
by fettling another Difcipline, which overthrows 
the Epifcopai. But I may boldly affirm, that had 
they proceeded abroad after the manner of England, 


Episcopacy Afferted. 193 

the Reformation of Religion would have made a 
quicker, and greater progrefs, both in France^ and 
other Countries of Europe^ than it has : And thofe 
Proteftant Churches, which have been driven away, 
would be at this time fully poffeffed of the Land of 
their Nativity. I am willing to believe every thing 
that may be faid in favour, or excufe of the firft fo- 
regn Reformers, from the Circumltances of Time, 
and State of Affairs, when rhey began their feveral 
Reformations, and to look upon them with all the 
Compatfion, and juftAllowances, that are due to good 
Wen, who were eager, and zealous to come out of 
Babylon on any terms. But all that can be alledged 
for them, tho' it may excufe, yet in my opinion it can- 
not ftri£lly juftifie their caltingoff Epifcopacy, much 
•lefs the perfeverance of their Churches in the Abdica- 
tion of it, becaufe they are no longer under the Diffi- 
culties, and Obftacles, which are pleaded in excufe 
of their firlt Reformers from neceffity, efpecially the 
want of orthodox Bifhops, which they may now have, 
and might have had for many Years path But what 
Excufe can be pretended for fuch of them here, as 
have found an Orthodox Hierarchy eftablifh'd in this 
Church ^ and yet will not conform to it : But efpe- 
cially for the Natural-born Subjects, who have caufe- 
lefly withdrawn from it, and can by no means be 
prevailed upon to fubmlt to it? Certainly the Non- 
conformity of thefe is Inexcufahle $ and the more, 
becaufe it proceeds from a r^fraftory Spirit, which 
kecks at the fight of thofe who are Commiffioned 
to have the Rule over them, and whom they ought 
to obey. And the more yet, becaufe it is the effefl 
of a molt unaccountable, and pernicious Principle 5 
that it is contrary to their Chriftian Liberty- and 
that where there are Superiors, there muft be all 
manner of Violence, and Diforder. Whereas no- 
thing is more plain, than that it is by the juft Obe- 
dience the Inferior pays to the Superior, that good 
Urder is prefer yec} in Government, without which 

O both 

i94 The Divine Right of 

both Religion, and the Civil Adminiftration, would 
be but Licentioufnefs, and Anarchy. 

It is not fo difficult to extricate the State of the 
Church-affairs in this third Century, as in the two 
preceding -, whether becaufe we have more Relations 
of it extant, or that the Churches multiplied, and 
gathered ftrength throughout the World, notwith- 
standing the terrible Perfections they underwent 
by the Cruelty of the Heathen Emperors? And in- 
deed the Epifcopal Government noc only continued, 
and the DiftinQion of the three Degrees was kept up 
in the Miniftry j but the Number of the Bif hops in- 
creafing through the multiplicity of Churches, and 
Cities converted to the Faith, with the Country 
about them, it was thought neceflary about this 
time, in feveral parts, to unite them under one Arch- 
1>ifhop, Primate, or Metropolitan $ or they appeared 
more vifibly to be fo already, by the meeting of 
Synods. At firft, when the Gofpei was preach'd 
but in few places, and before the Chriftian Reli- 
gion had diffufed it felf far and wide, as it did af- 
terwards ^ the Bifhops, who were fettled in the 
Cities, governed the Churches that had been ga- 
thered there, and in the Country adjoyning-, and 
inftru&ed, and edified them, with the afiiftance of 
their Presbyters, or Deacons. Thus it was at Jeru- 
fa/em, Antioch, Corinth, Athens, and other Diltricls ; 
where the Bifhop h3d the fuperior Adminiftration 
of Affairs, and his Clergy under him-, and the fe- 
veral Congregations made as it were one Body of a 
Church. But in the Times following, when Bi- 
fhops came to be Qr&ainecl in every City, Tit. i. 5. 
or as it is in the Original, xj! vhh.iv ; i. e. accord- 
ing" to the City, as it was the Cuftom in every City, 
to have a chief Magiftrate 5 it was judged requifite, 
to anfwer the general Occafions of the Provincial, 
National, and Catholick Church ^ and for Order's 
ftke, that thole particular Churches fhould affo- 
ciate together, and be under the Direction of aq 


Episcopacy Afferted. 1 9 5 

Archbifhop, Primate, or Metropolitan* whofeSeat 
was in the Metropolis, or Mother-City. What 
probably had been done, or was intended to be 
done in the very time of the Apofiles-, when Bi- 
fhops, and Churches were grown numerous in 3 
Province, or Country * or were like to become fo. 
For thus St. Timothy, to whom St. Paul commit- 
ted the Government of the Church of Epbefus, 
which confifted at firft of the Chriftian Congrega- 
tions in that City, and the Suburbicarian Country 5 
had the general Superintendence of all the Churches 
of the leiTer Afia, being then an Ecclefiaftical Pro- 
vince, as we have obferved before. And thus 
St. Titus, whom the fame Apoftle left in Crete, 
to fupply what was wanting, and form that Church 5 
was appointed by him Dire£lor of the whole Ifland, 
which is faid to have had an hundred Cities in it, 
But in this Century, Chriftianity was fo diffufed 
every where, and the Churches were fo increafed in 
Number $ that it became as it were a general Rule^ 
to reduce them under the Infpeclion of a Primates 
To the end a good Harmony and Agreement fhould 
be preferved amongft them, both in Doftrine, and 
Difcipiine. And fo the Bifhop of " a Alexandria^ 
which was look'd 'upon as the Mother-Church, and 
the Center of Epifcopacy ^ was Primate of Egypt ^ 
Lybia, and Pentapolis 3 the Bifhop of Rome Pri- 
mate of Italy, or the Weftern Provinces b h the Bi- 
fliop of Lyons Primate of the Gauls c ; the Bifhop 
of Carthage Primate of Africa d ; And fo of the refh, 
which might be named here. In which Quality 
they fummon'd Synods of their Comprovincial Bt- 
fhops, when the Occafions of their Churches re- 

* Eufeb. Hift. Ecclef. lib. 2. cap. 1$, Ibid, cap 24. 
b Cone. Nic. Can. <5. Ibid. 

c Eufeb. Hid. Ecclef. lib. 5. cap. 2$. 
d Cctjc. Coofhtitinop. in Trull. Can. 2. 

O % qrfrdi 

1 96 The Divine Right of 

quired it •, as * St. Cyprian did one at Carthage, of 
iixty fix Bifhops, to decide the Queftion, Whether 
Children were to be Baptized the third, or eighth 
Day after their Birth? And fo had t Agrippinus 
calfd one before, of the Bifhops of Africa, and 
Numidia^ to determine another Difpute, Whether 
thofe that had been Baptized by Heretick c , were to 
be Baptized anew > To fay nothing of the great 
Council of that Province under St. Cyprian, which 
confifted of eighty feven Bifhops 5 or of others in 
other Places : Which it is not neceffary to men- 
tion here. 

But though the Government of the Church lies 
open throughout this Period, and can hardly be 
controverted by our Adversaries ^ yet to follow my 
propofed Method, I muft fhew how the fame Hie- 
rarchy was continued in this Age, as in the two 
former •, and the DlftinQion of Degrees obferved 
in the Miniftry. To which purpofe, I need only 
produce fuch real Fa£ts 3 and good Authorities, as 
are to be met with up and down in the Hittory of 
the Church, and the Writings of the Fathers in 
this Century. The firft thing then that I am to 
fhew, is how at this time there were Bifhops in 
the feveral Churches, who prefided over the reft 
of the Clergy within their Diftritts. Upon which 
the fecond depends, as a neceffary Confequence •, 
that the Degrees in the Miniftry were diftinguifh'd y 
and that the Orders of Presbyter, and Deacon, were 
inferior to that of Bifhop. 

It would be tedious to carry on here the Suc- 
ceffion of the Epifcopal Line in the feveral Churches 
I have mentioned in the fecond Century 5 and ic 
would be even ufelefs to do it. For there is no 
Man, that is the leait converfant in Chriftian Anti- 

* Cypr. Epift. 64. ad Fidum. 
f Ibid. Epift, 71. ad Quintum. 


Episcopacy Ajferted. 197 

quity, but knows the Name of every Bifhop in 
thofe famous Sees 5 and that the Fathers have left 
us exa£l Lifts of them in their Writings. There 
we may fee, who were the Bifhops that fucceeded 
thofe of the fecond Age, in the Churches of Jew- 
fale)®, Antiocb, and the others I have inftanced in^ 
even throughout the whole courfe of this, But 
efpecially we have therein a juft Catalogue of thofe 
of Rome :, and an account of their Lives, Doctrine, 
and Difctpline. How they held that See one after 
another •, and Ordained in their refpe&ive times 
Bifhops, Presbyters, and Deacons. And how they 
even called Synods of them, as Primates in their 
Province, when the Occafions of the Church re- 
quired it. And though it cannot be denied, that 
ibme of them carry'd it very high, and had even 
then too much Influence over the Comprovincial 
Clergy ^ yet it muft be confeffed too, that there 
were others within that Period, who acquitted 
themfelves worthily ^ and were either Martyrs, or 
ConfelTors for the Caufe of Chrift. Amongft thefe 
I cannot forbear naming three, viz. Lucius, Ste- 
phen, and Sixties ^ who held the See of Rome fuc- 
ceifively, and fucceeded one another in the Glory 
of their Sufferings : And whom I fhould blufh to 
accufe of having been fo much as willing, out of 
a Spirit of Vanity, to overthrow the ancient Difci- 
pline, to eftablifh a Tyrannical Government in the 

But though, to avoid being tedious, I think it 
not material to draw up a Catalogue of the Bifhops 
of thofe celebrated Churches in this Century -, yet 
there is one Inftance, which I may not pafs over 
in filence in the See of Jerufalem ^ becaufe we 
meet with a Facl. in it, which tends much to the 
clearing up of the Ecclefiaftical Difcipline of the 
Piimitive Times. And it is that of Alexander 
O b Bifhor 

ip8 The Divine Right of 

Bifhop ofNeoca/area in Cappadocia •, of whom Eufe- 
bim * relates, that he was afterwards conftitutedBi- 
fiiop of Jerufalem\ tho' Narcijjfus^ who filled the 
Chair, was then alive: And that in regard of his 
great Courage in bearing up againft the Sufferings 
of Perfecution, which were in a manner unavoidable 
in thofe Days. This extraordinary Proceeding of 
the Church, is a matter of Fa£t in Hiftory, which 
requires fome Reflection to be made upon it. And 
the more, becaufe I have iufinuated all along, that 
in the flrft Ages of Chriftianity, though there might 
be feveral Bifhops in one and the fame Church, 
either as Coadjutors, or barely Titular * yet the 
Chair, and the Epifcopai Authority belonged but 
to one Peribn, the Bifhop of that See-, and could 
doc be divided. Notwithftanding here are two 
Bifhops, who feem to prefide at the fame time 
ever the See of Jerujahm-, and two Heads, as it 
, that appear upon the Body of its Clergy •, 
• looks monftrous! But it is evident from the 
Relation, that this w T as an extraordinary Cafe, and 
oux of the common Road : So that far from de- 
cg the Unity of Epifcopacy, and the indivi- 
sible Authority of cne Bifhop in one Church 5 it 
proves, and confirms it. For the Hiltorian takes 
notice ofit, as of an unufual thing. A plain fign, 
that the Cuftom was other wife -, and that the Con- 
iiitnuon was, one See to be governed by one Bifloop, 
And if it happened differently in the Promotion of 
.■ncler h it was but an Exception made to the 
.al Rule, to affociate him with Narcijjxs, and 
him in the Chair with him. The Eftablifh'd was not obfervecj, upon his particular ac- 
cc Lint, or rather hisColiegue's ; And there were non- 
et nmor) Reafons ror it, whereof the f 1 gives 
us thefe two. One is, that Mat'cifftis being grown 

* Eufeb. Hift. Ecdcf, lib. 6. f Ibid - 


Episcopacy Ajferted. 1 99 

very old, and infirm ^ Aged an hundred and fixteen 
Years ^ and confequenrly unable to exerciie the 
Epifcopal Office ; and Alexander a Perfon of a di. 
ftinguifh'd Merit : Left the Church fhould fufter 
too much by the Age of the one, and for want of 
the Affiftance of the other ^ it was thought but pru- 
dent to ftep over the Rule, Neceffity fometimes 
d'rfpenfing with the Law. And the other Reafon 
given, is Miraculous, and Divine, tJ ShW^w'iey 5 
For the fame Hiftorian* reports, that the Day thar 
Alexander enter'd the City, (befides a private 
Warning to him in a Dream, to go thither) a Voice 
was clearly heard, by thofe who were moft emi- 
nent for SanQity amongft them, faying, Go out, 
and receive him, whom God intends for your Bi/hop, 
Whereat the Clergy, and People, thinking that 
Heaven it feif gave its Vote for the Admiffion of 
Alexander • both by this Reafon of Providence, and 
that of Neceffity, they received him for their Bi- 
fhop-, and look'd upon his Promotion as Heavenly, 
and from God. But upon the whole matter, it is 
pretty plain, that Narcijjus retained but the Title 
of Bijhop t. 

I might here (hew, how the fame Hierarchy ob- 
tained in all the other Churches, where the Chri- 
ftian Religion was planted ; and fet down the 
Names of the Bifhops, Presbyters, and Deacons, 
which I find in Hiftory •, that this Form of Govern- 
ment might appear to have been univerfal in the 
Church. And indeed it was fo : For neither in the 
Times before, nor in this I fpeak of, were there 
Chriftians feen, who made a Seel: apart, indepen- 
dent upon a Bifhop. If fome turbulent, and am- 
bitious Spirits, ran into a Schifm *, it was never to 
the Deftru£lion of the Epifcopal Authority : The 

* Eufeb. Hid. Ecclef. lib. 6. cap.ii. 
f bid. Alex. Epift. ad Antin. 

O 4 very 

aoo The DivineRighto/ 

very Schifmaticks glorying in it, that they had a 
Bifhop upon whom they depended. It would 
have been an odious Object in thofe Days, to fee 
a Church profeffing Chriltianity, without a Head, 
and a Subordination in its Miniflry. And there- 
fore I (hall but here and there give fome Inftances 
of this Matter, as they come in my way $ that I 
may proceed with the Authorities of the Writers 
in this Century • which is my fecond Method of 
profecuting this Argument. The Fathers then, that 
have been moft eminent for their Writings within 
this Period, were Tertullian^ Origen, of whom I 
have already given fome account, and St. Cyprian $ 
who not only in their Works, but by their very 
Example prove Epifcopacy, and the Diftinction of 
the Degrees in the Miniflry. 

To go on then whence I left off, in the lad 
Chapter, viz. the famous School cf Alexandria -, 
Gregory of Neoctfarea, who was firft called Tbeo- 
dotvs, and his Brother Athenodorus, were both 
Difciples of Origen, when he taught in Cdfarea^ 
a City in Palejline*. Under this excellent Matter 
rhcy improved fo much, that being Natives of 
JSeocafarea^ they were promoted to the Epifcopal 
Dignity in the Province of Cappadocia || :, and the 
former in the place of their Birth t, the Metropo- 
lis of that Country. This Gregory was afterwards 
furnam'd lhaumaturgus\ i. c. Worker of Miracles , 
as very well he might be, if that be true which is 
:£ recorded of him h viz. that when he was made 
Bifhop, he found but feventeen Chriflians^ and 
and when he died, he left but feventeen Heathens 
in. his Diocefe. Ueraclas *, who fucceeded Origen 3 

* Greg. Thaum. Paneg. ad Orig. 

|| Eufeb. Hift. Ecclef. lib. 6. cap. 30. 

t Greg. Nytf. Vic. Gr. Thaum. $ Ibid. 

* E'ifeb. Hift. Ecclef. lib, 6. cap. 3. 


Episcopacy Afferted. 20 1 

was firft a Presbyter of the Church of Alexandria *, 
but after the Death of Demetrius was advanced to 
the * Epifcopai Chair in that See. And fo was 
likewifetD/^7?^, after he had been % Reftor of 
that School, and a Presbyter of that Church ^ as 
appears in Hiftory. And fo were others made Bi- 
fhops, after they had been Presbyters. But it is 
obfervable, ihnNicepborus CalUJius, |j in the Cata- 
logue he has drawn up of theBKhops otConftanti- 
nople to the time of Conftantine the Great, names 
Dometius, Brother of the Emperor Probus^ and his 
two Sons, Nephews to him ^ viz. P rob us, and Me- 
trophanes. Which, if true, (hews the Epifcopai 
Degree to have been in an high Efteem at that 
time in the World, fince a Brother, and two Ne- 
phews of the Emperor did not think it below them 
to bear that Quality : And that they would not 
doubtlefs have done it, if it had not been look'd 
upon as a diftinguifh'd Station in the Church. And 
as that Office was in great Veneration, fo it had 
no lefs Authority over Perfons of all Ranks*, who 
willingly fubmkted to its fevered Cenfures, and 
refpe£tfully underwent its moft grievous Penances. 
Which gives me occafion to relate here a Fa£t, we 
meet with in Eufebius, * viz. that Philip, who 
was the firft Roma/2 Emperor that was converted 
to the Faith, having declared his Intention to be 
prefent at the Eajier- Devotions-, (this was about 
the middle of this Century) the Bilhop of Rome 
would not receive him, till he had firft made a 
publick Confeffion of his Sins. This (hews in 
what Poft the Bifhops flood in thofe Days, and 
how much they were raifed above the inferior 

* Eufeb. Hift. Ecclef. lib. 6, cap. 25. f Ibid. cap. 2p. 
$ Ibid, 35. 

j| Niceph. Callift. Hift. Ecclef. lib. 2. cap. tf. 

* Eufcb. Hift. Ecclef. lib. 5. cap. 34, 


202 The Divine Right of 

Orders-, fince they fet Rules to the Emperors 
tbemfelves, and expefted a Complyance from them 
to the Difcipline of the Church. The very Pagan 
Emperors made a Diftin&ion between them, and 
the reft of the Chriftian Clergy. It is evident in 
Ga/ierfs Edi£t, who held the Empire in the Year 
of our Lord 260. that he look'd upon Epifcopacy, 
as the higheft Degree in the Miniftry. For being 
inclined to caufe the Perfecution to ceafe, which 
was carry'd on againft the Chriftians in feveral Pro- 
vinces of his Dominions ^ he iflued out a Refcript, 
which he * dire&ed to Dionyfius^ Vinnas, Deme- 
trius^ and the other Bifhops ^ to let them know, 
that it was his pleafure they fhould be all recalled, 
who had been forc'd away upon the account of 
their Religion *, and that no Difturbance fhould be 
given them in their AfTemblies. 

Tertullian^ though a Man of great Parts, and a 

zealous Defender of the Chriftians 5 never rofe 

higher, than to the Degree of a Presbyter in the 

CrTurch of Carthage : But yet has left us feveral 

Temarkabie PaiTages in his Writings concerning this 

r. In his Apology t he takes particular notice 

ie Bifhops, under rhe name of Seniors^ (which 

anfwersto the word Presbyters, the Original Name 

of Bifhops) as prefiding in their Religious AiTem- 

: Prtfident probati qui we Seniores, Honor em 

tjfum non Pretio, fed. Tefiimomo adept i : neque 

cnim pretio ulla res Dei con flat. And in his Book 

>rona l| he feems to infinuate, as if they re- 

d the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper from 

Rone but rhe Prefidenrs, or Bifhops $ Ecclefit Sa- 

ntum nee de aliorum quam Pr.tfidcntium ma- 

tiufumimus. But in his Book De Baptifmo% he is 

* Etffeb. Hifr. Eccief. lib. 7. cap. 13. 
t Terr. Apol. cap 99. j| De Cor, cap, .) 

3d?:> cap. 1 7. 

6 » very 

E p I s c Q p A c Y AJferted. 203 

very plain, as to the Right of Adminiftring the 
Sacrament of Baptifm, that it is derived from the 
Bifhops-, wherein likewife he exprefly mentions 
the three Orders in the Miniftry : Dandi quidem 
(Bapti/mum) jus babet Jummus Sacerdos^ qui eft E- 
pifcopus deb'inc Presbytery (y Diaconi •, non tamen 
fine Epifcopi auttor'itate^ propter Ecclefit honorem ; 
quo falvo,falva pax eft To which I (hall add ano- 
ther Paflage of the fame Author in the fame Book, 
* De Corona ^ wherein fpeaking of the Manner of 
Adminiftring this Sacrament, he tells us, that A- 
quam ad'iturt privs in Ecclefia, fub Antiftitis ma- 
nu conteftamur, &c. Which Cuftom, of making the 
Baptifmal Vow in the Church before the Bifhop, 
continued to be obferved afterwards in the Churches 
of Africa^ when Baptifm was adminiftred. And 
in how many places of his Works do we find him 
fuppofing, or distributing the Clergy into the three 
Orders of Bifhops, Presbyters, and Deacons! and 
even afferting the Apoftolical Inftitution of the 
firft ! By all which is evident, what Opinion he 
had of the Superiority of Bifhops over the reft of 
the Clergy, and of the Dittinftion of the Degrees 
in the Miniftry. In his Book t De Prtfcript. He- 
ret, he makes this Challenge to the Hereticks-, 
Edant orig'ines, &c. " Let them publifh the Ori- 
a ginal of their Churches, and unfold the Suc- 
" ceflions of their Bifhops in order from the be- 
" ginning^ fo that it may appear, that the firft 
u BKhop had one of the Apoftles, or Apoftolical 
" Men, who lived with the Apoftles, for his Pre- 
" deceffor. For thus the Apoftolical Churches re- 
" port «, as that of Smyrna affirms Polycarp to be 
" placed there by Sr. Jobn^ and that of Rome re- 
" ports Clement to have been Ordained by St.Peter. 
" In like manner other Churches (hew them, whom 

De Cor. cap. 3. f DePrxfcript. Hserec. cap. 32. 

* being 

204 Tfce DivineRight of 

cc being made Bifhops by the ApoftleSy they had 
w Propagators of the Apoftolical Do£trine. And 
let the Hereticks (hew the fame. And elfewhere 
to the fame effe£t- : * Fercurre Ecclefia* Apoftolicay^ 
apud quas ipfa adbuc Cathedra Apoftolorum fuk lo- 
ck prafident : babes Qor'intbum^ babes Epbefum, ha- 
bes FhilippoS) babes Romam^ &c. 


M herein the fame Proof is continued^ 
concerning the Hierarchy , and the 
Diflin&ion of the Degrees in the Mi- 
7ii\iry^ in the third Century. 

ORigen comes here regularly after Tertullian i 
And therefore, though I have accounted for 
feirn before, (viz. Chap. XVII.) as a Presbyter, 
lor the Reafon there alledged •, I mull now, as I 
promifed, deliver his Doctrine concerning this mat- 
ter 1 ,, as an eminent Author, who flourifhed within 
this Period. And here I may firit break out, as I 
did but juft now in the laft Cafe mentioned, into 
an Expoftulating Exclamation: In how many places 
of his Writings does Or'igen fuppofe, or diftribute 
the Clergy into the three Orders of Bilhops, Pref- 
foyters, and Deacons ^ and even affert the Divine 
inititution of the former ! Particularly in his Exe- 
getical, and fome other Works ! 

But to inftance in fome of the moft remarkable 
FalTages, relating to this Subject ^ in his fecond 

* I>e Prafcript. Herec. cap. 36. 


Episcopacy Jfferted. 205 

Homily t or Difcourfe upon the Canticles, (whe- 
ther right, or wrong, is not material to enquire-, 
fince it is but in Confirmation of his Opinion, and 
the current DoQrine of his time) he difcovers a 
Prophetical Vifion, concerning the three Orders in 
the Miniftry, which he there enumerates. In his 
eleventh Homily * on Jeremiah's Prophecy, he has 
thefe words exprefly ; " More will be required of 
' ; me, (who was a Presbyter, as we have feen) 
" thari of a Deacon -, more of a Deacon, than of 
ce a Laick : But he has moil to account for, who 
<c has the Ecclefiaftical Principality over us all ^ 
" viz. the Bifhop. In his twentieth Homily || on 
St. Luke, he fpeaks thus 5 " If Jefus Chrift, the Son 
" of God, is fubjecl to Jofeph, and Mary-. Shall 
" not I be fubjeft to the Bifhop, who is of Qo± 
a ordained to be my Father ? Shall not I be fub- 
" jeft to the Presbyter, who by the Divine Vouch- 
fatement is fet over me > In his Commentaries up- 
on St. Matthew, he alledges peculiar Texts of 
Scripture againft the fecond Marriages of Prielts, 
and Deacons^ (fuch was his Opinion) as diftin- 
guifh'd from Bifhops : Befides thofe he urges a- 
gainft the fecond Marriages of thefe latter. In the 
fame he tells us:}:, That St. Paul defcribing what 
Bifhops ought to be, fays, That they tnujl be no 
Brawlers, nor Strikers -, but ?neek, and of gentle 
Behaviour ; having all thofe good Qualifications, 
which thofe Stewards ought to have, zvhom our Lord 
fets over hi* family ; as St. Luke has it. And 
there t explaining that PaiTage of this Evangelilr, 
And he that it Chief, as he that ferveth ; he takes 
it for a Precept to 2 Bifhop. In his third Bock 

f Orig. Hem. 2. in Cant. Cant, apud Hieron. Tom. 7. p. 1 1 c. 

* Idem. Horn 11. in Hierem. 

j| Ejufdem Exeget. Edit. Lot. Horn. 20. in Luc. 

$ Ibid. Horn. 31. in Match. f Ibid. Hem. 52. 

6 againft 

2o6 The Divine Right of 

againft Celfus, he fuppofes, that the Apoftle, iT'wu 
iii. gives LheCharafter of a Bfhop, as diftinguifh'd 
from a Presbyter. In his Book concerning Prayer-, 
difcourfing of the Debts contained in that Petition 
of the Lord's Prayer, forgive us our Debts, as we 
alfo forgive our Debters ; after he has fpoken of 
the Duties common to all Chriftians, he fubjoins, 
* " Bellies thefc more common or univerfal Debts, 
" there is a Debt peculiar to fuch as are Widows 
" maintained by the Church-, and there is a Debt 
" peculiar to Deacons :, and another peculiar to 
is Presbyters: But of all thefe peculiar Debts, that 
cc which is due by the Bifhop, is the greateft*, it is 
cc exacted by the Saviour of the whole Church ^ 
cc and the Bifhop mult fmart fevereiy for it, if it is 
"not paid. And if our Adverfaries will admit of 
a fair Confequence, and give credit to Eujebiu^ 
who tells us, t that Origen in his fifth Commentary 
upon St. John s Gofpei, holds the Opinion con- 
cerning the Church's being built upon St. Peter •> 
it is not to be queltion'd, but he believed, as the 
other Fathers did, that Epifcopacy was of Divine 

The Story oiNovatus, and Novatianus, contains 
fo many Particulars, relating to the State of the 
Hierarchy in this Century -, that I may not pafs it 
by here, without infifting a little upon it. We 
have it related by Eufebim, who quotes the Tefti- 
monies of St. Cyprian Bifhop of Carthage, and Cor- 
nelius Bifhop of Rome at that time, for what he 
ftys. There then Cornelius writes Letters to Fa- 
bius Bifhop of Antioch concerning Novatianus, 
whereof that Hiftorian gives an Abftrac"t. But be- 
fore I proceed to that, it will not be amifs, that 
I inform the Reader firft of what the Bifhop of 

* Idem. GieVfLvyjaS) pag. ic^. Edit. Oxon. 
f Eufeb. Hill. EccleX libetf. cap. 25. £ Ibid, cip.4?. 


Episcopacy Afftrted. 107 

Carthage writes about Novatus, in his Letter to 
the Bifhop of Rome. After he has then given him 
a Relation * of feveral Diforders he had caufed in 
his Church, whereof he had Ordained him a Pref- 
byter*, he accufes him particularly, that by his 
Fa&ions, and ambitious Humour, he had procured 
Felicijjimus to be admitted Deacon, without his 
(St/Cyprian's) PermiiTion, or Knowlqjj|e. But 
i Cornelius takes the thing higher 5 and acquaints 
Fabius, that the Bifhop of Carthage having con- 
ceived fome Love, and Efteem for Novatus ♦, would 
make him a Presbyter-, which his Clergy, and Peo- 
ple oppofed ftrenuouily ^ becaufe he was one of 
thofe who w T ere Baptized in Bed : Yet that he pre- 
vailed at laft by his Intreaties, having ask'd their 
confent, that he might Ordain that one Man only 5 
and promiiing, that it fhould be no Precedent for 
the future * which was granted. Let that be as it 
will : The Account goes on, X that this Novatus 
. being of a turbulent Spirit, and feeing himfelf & 
Presbyter •, he was not fatisned with having made 
a Schifm at Carthage •, but he would needs go to 
Rome, to propagate it, or join with that which 
was on foot there already •, and perhaps to advance 
himfelf. And indeed he> or || rather Novatianus, (tho* 
they are confounded in Hiftoty ) who was a Pref 
byter of Rome, and aflociated with the other in his 
FaQion-, afpired to that See: Though by an af- 
fected Humility, he fwore feveral times, that he 
had no Thoughts of it. But his Proceedings foon 
fhew'd the contrary. For between them they got 
three Bifhops to come to Rome, where they had 
made a Party amongft the lower Clergy 5 and to 
Ordain him Bifhop of that Church ^ and this to 

* Cypr. Epift. 52. ad Corn. 

f Com. Epi/r. ad Fab. apud Eufeb. Hift. EccJef, lib, 6. cap«4- 

% Cypr. & Corn. Ibid- || Com, Ibid, 


2o8 The Divine Right of 

thruft out Cornelius, who had been duly * fettled 
there. To which end they raifed a Se£l in the 
Church, upon the occafion of the Lapfers-, pre- 
tending that thofe that had yielded to Perfecution, 
were not to be received into Communion again. 
And to make their Party confpicuous, they called 
themfelvgs Catbari, or the Pure •, as if they had 
been hdRr than others in their ProfefTion, and 
Principles, particularly upon the account of their 
Severity to thofe Men. Whereby feveral well- 
meaning Perfons were impofed upon , and even 
fome, otherwife worthy Presbyters, joined with 
them bona fide, (if that may be properly faid) for 
a time. But thefe at laft left them, being convin- 
ced of their Hypocrifie : And thofe very Men that 
had Ordained the Schifmatick, were brought over 
to acknowledge their Fault. For the Bifhops of 
the Province, perceiving that Novatus, or rather 
as I have faid, Novatianus -, or, if you will, both 
of them -, difturbed the Peace of the Church by 
their Schifm, and Faftion -, met together in a Sy- 
nod tat Rome, to the number of Sixty, befides the 
Presbyters, and Deacons, who were prefent at it : 
And depofed the Ufurper, who would jultle Cor- 
nelius out of the Chair ^ after they had firlt con- 
demned his Errors, and Proceedings. The Names 
of thofe Bifhops are fet down in one of thofe 
Letters, which Cornelius writ to Fabius •, as are 
thofe of the others, who afterwards fubfcribed to 
their Decree, though abfenr, in Teltimony of their 
approving that Condemnation. But I mull not for- 
get to take notice, that the fame Cornelius in jj one 
of thofe Letters, charges Novatianus, that he had 
procured himfelf to be Ordained Bifhop of Rome 5 
" being wilfully ignorant, that in a truly Catholick 

* Eufeb. Hift. Ecclef. lib. 6. cap. 43. f Ibid. 
|| Ibid. 

" Church 

Episcopacy Ajferted. ' ~ 

t% Church, (fuch as was that of Rome) there ought 
- c to be but one Biihop ; though there may be ma* 
" ny Presbyters, (as there were forty four then in 
" that Churchy) i.e. that according to the Apo- 
ftolicai Tradition, and left the Unity be divided^ 
there ought not to be jointly two Bifhops in one 
and the fame See. Thofe are his very Words, as 
they are reported by Eufebius $ or the plain Senfe 
of them. 

I fhall not examine here, how Novatus is con- 
founded in the Writings of the Fathers with A T o- 
vatianus, though they were two diftinft Men ^ or 
whether in that Confufion the Aftions of the one 
are attributed to the other ? That is not neceflary 
to my prefent purpofe. It is fufficient, that the 
things I have reported^ are true of the one, or the 
other $ according to the Teftimonies ofSt.Cypria/t, 
Cornelius, and Eufebius. My bufinefs is now, to 
make fome Obfervations , and lay down fome 
Truths, which are evidently contained in that Ac- 
count. It is apparent then, I. That it was the 
received Do&rine of that time, that there ought 
to be in one Catholick Churchy wherein the Unity 
of the Spirit is held, but one Bifhop to Govern ir s 
though there may be feveral Presbyters undei him. 
For Cornelius reprefents it as a Crime, and an af- 
fefted Ignorance in Novatianus , that he fhould 
attempt to ftep into the Chair of Rome, when him- 
felf waspoffeffed of it already $ a thing the other 
could not be ignorant was unlawful^ and contrary to 
the univerfal Pra&ice. 2. That thofe who were on* 
ly admitted into the Office of Presbyters, were not 
thereby made Bifhops. If it had been otherwife, 
Novatianus had no need to procure three Bifhops 
to raife him to the Epifcopai Dignity, and to ob- 
ferve the accuftom'd Formalities: Being Presbyter 
otRome, he was likewife Bifhop, if thefe Orders 
are not different. 3. That the Office of a Bifhop, 

P was 

2io The Divine Right of 

was a higher Degree in the Miniftry, than that of 
a Presbyter. If it had been otherwife •, the Pride 
of Kovatianus would not have made him pretend 
to be a Bifhop : But he knew what he was about 5. 
and he look'd upon that Station in the Church, as 
an eminent one, and worthy his Ambition, which 
could not he latisfy'd with his being a Presbyter. 
4. That there was a DiftinQion made in the Sy- 
nods between the Bifhops, and the Presbyters, as 
being of different Orders. The fixty Bifhops, who 
met in the Synod ztRome^ to condemn Novatianm^ 
and the Principles of thatSe£l-, held another Rank 
in that Ailembly, than the Presbyters, and Dea- 
cons. 5. That Bifhops could not be Ordain'd, but 
by Bifhops $ and a certain number was neceiTary 
tor that, two or three, prefcribed by the * Canons 
of the Church. The Cuiiorn was,, t that the Me- 
tropolitan lent Circular Letters to ail the Neigh- 
bouring Bifhops in his Province, to come and af- 
fift him in the Choice of the Perfon, and fome in 
performing the Ceremony of Confecration $ as I 
have intimated before. Whereas a Bilhop in his 
Church ordained Presbyters, after he had ask'd the 
Advice of his Clergy, and the Approbation of the 
People. St. Cyprian Ordained 'Nov at us Presbyter •, 
but ~Novatianus was forced to get three Bifhops, it 
ieems, to be regularly Confecrated •, without which 
he knew he could not pretend to it. 6. That it 
was look'd upon as a fault, to procure another Bi- 
fhop to Ordain a Man, without the proper Dio- 
ce Tin's Licenfe. Otherwife St. Cyprian would have 
had no caufe to complain, that by the procurement 
of Novatus, I'cliajjimus was fo admitted into the 
Order of Deacon. 

I perceive, I am infenfibly fallen upon St. Cy- 
ho was one of the molt eminent Fathers 

* Can. A port. 1. t Cypr. Epift. $8. 


Episcopacy Afferted. 2 1 .1 

in that Age, and gives a very great Light into thefe 
matters, both by his Doftrine, and Example. That 
famous Man did not only arrive at the higheft Dig- 
nity in the Church, though without his feeking, 
and much againft his Mind 5 having fhunned it as 
far as he could ■ ( fuch was his Modefty :) But he 
afcended to it by degrees, and began at the loweft 
Office. For the Writer of his Life, * Pontius, makes 
him to have been firft a Deacon in the Church of 
Carthage •, when he tells us, " That whilft he was 
c one of them, i.e. a Deacon, (for this Author is 
owned to have been no more,) " he had an Inti- 
" macy with Coxilius, an excellent Perfon, who 
1 was then, both by Age and Honour, a Presbyter. 
Then he was made a Presbyter. And laftly a Bifhop, 
It would be as tedious for me, and the Reader ^ as 
it is unneceffary, after what I have already quoted, 
to inlfance in the fe vera 1 places, wherein St. Cy- 
prian throughout his Works mentions the three 
Orders in the Miniftry, as diftinft, and fubordinate-, 
or to take notice of the many Terms, and Ex- 
preflions he ufes, to fet forth the Eminency and 
Superiority of the Bifhop over the Presbyters, and 
Deacons ; or even toalledge thofe exprefs Paflages, 
wherein he fuppofes, or lays down the Divine In- 
ftitution of Epifcopacy. I (hall therefore content 
my feif with repeating fome of the moft remark- 
able Authorities upon thefe Heads ^ to fhew the 
Doftrine of this Learned Father, and of his Time, 
concerning the Hierarchy of the Church. 

Nothing is plainer, than that the Ecclefiafticai 
State confided of thefe three Orders, as diltincl, and 
fubordinate^ if we do but examine the Infcription 
of St. Cyprians t Letter to the Clergy, who by 
Decius the Emperor's Edi£t, were condemned to, 

* Pont. Vit. Cvpr. 

f Cypr. Epift. 7$. 2d Nem. Fcl. Zee. 

P 2 

3 I 2 The DlVINERlGHTtff 

and a&ually fuffefd in the Mines. The Letter is 
formally Infcribed or directed to the Bifhops, whom 
be Names particularly*, then to the Presbyters -, 
and laftly, to the Deacons. Although in the Body 
of it he (peaks jointly to them $ and endeavours 
to comfort them in their common forrowful Con- 
dition. He would never have committed fuch an 
Abfurdity, if there had not been thefe three diftincY 
Orders in the Miniftry : But he writes there ac- 
cording to the Stile of his Time, and the Truth of 
the Thing. And even when he was in his Banish- 
ment, he confidered the State of his own Church, 
as made up of htmfelf, and his Presbyters, and 
Deacons s For he writes to thefe, as their Bifhop-, 
and exhorts them, in his abfence, to take fpecial 
care of the Poor, and the Confeffbrs, and to com- 
ibrt them in their Afflictions. If he had look'd 
upon them as one Order, he would not have fo 
diftinguifh'd them-, and if he had thought them 
his Equals, he would have treated them as his 
Coliegues : But he knew, that he being their Bi- 
(hop, they bore but the Degree of Presbyters, and 

The Contefts which happen'd in St. Cyprian's 
time, between him, and fome of his Clergy -, and 
between other Bifhops, and fome of theirs -, gave 
him occafion to exprefs himfelf very plainly in fe- 
verai Cafes concerning the Superiority of the Bi- 
(hop over the Presbyters, and Deacons. Whilft he 
was in his Exile, fome of his Presbyters, by their 
own Authority, and without confuiting him, took 
upon them to reftore the Lapfers to the Peace of 
the Church. What does St. Cyprian thereupon ? 
He writes to them a (harp Letter, wherein he 
charges them with forgetting their own Station, 
and his : And tells them farther, that fuch a thing 

» T . " ' „ i ■■■■.■■■ .,1 i i . ..» . n 

J Cypr. Epift. 14. ad Prcsb, & Diac. 


Episcopacy Afferted. 2 1 3 

was never before attempted under any of his Pre- 
deceffors. * " What, fays he, ought we not to be 
" afraid of the Wrath of God ^ when fome Pref- 
" byters, neither mindful of the Gofpel, nor of 
<c their own Place - 9 neither thinking on the future 
" Judgment of God, nor on the Bifhop their Su- 
" periour for the time j are fo bold as to aflume 
'■ all to themfelves, to the Contempt and Reproach 
<c of their Bifhop ; A thing never heretofore at- 
" tempted under any of my Predeceflbrs ! Rcga- 
tianus having written to St. Cyprian concerning art 
infolent Deacon, who being likewife unmindful of 
his own, and his Bifhop's Poft in the Church, did 
very much difturb him ^ he returns him this An- 
fwer, to encourage him to make him fenfible of 
his Epifcopal Power, and Superiority, t " Deacons 
" ought to remember, fays he, that our Lord chofe 
" the Apoftles, ie. the Bifhops, and Prelates * 
c but that it was the Apoftles, that after his A- 
c fcenfion appointed the Deacons, to be Minifters 
c of their Epifcopacy, and of the Church. Where- 
" fore as we (Bifhops) ought to do nothing againft 
cc God, who makes Bifhops j fo neither ought Dea- 
" cons to do any thing againft us, by whom they 
tt are made. It is neceflary therefore, that your 
u Deacon, concerning whom you write, fhould do 
" Penance for his Infolency, and acknowledge the 
tc Dignity of the Prieft, and make Satisfa&ion to 
" the Bifhop his Superior in all Humility. The 
Letter that the Roman Presbyters, and Deacons writ 
to |1 St.Cyprian, with whom they held Correfpon- 
dence, after the Death of Fabianus their Bifhop 5 
and which is found amongft his Works ; contains 
a pretty plain proof, amongft other Points, that 

* Cypr. Epift. i5. ad Presb. & Diac, 

+ Ibid. Epift. 3. ad Rogac. 

|| Ibid» Epift. CIcr. Rom. 30. ad Cypr# 

P3 they 

214 The Divine Right of 

they believed the Epifcopal Pre-eminency, and Su- 
periority. For the See of Riome being then vacant, 
they acquaint him, that they had refolved amongft 
themfelves, " Till God gave them a Bifhop, that 
cc the Cafe of the Lapfers fiiould be refpited, /'. c. 
cc that they would not give them Absolution, un- 
" lefs they were in peril of Death $ or to that ef- 
fect They thought then, that it belonged to the 
Office of their Bifhop, as their Superior ^ and 
therefore they were willing to ftay till they had 
one. They had been inftructed, that the ordering 
of Ecciefiaftical Affairs, and Discipline, was refer- 
red to the Bifhop : And they look'd upon the Go- 
as fufpended, until the Chair was filled 
up by him, who was to be fee at their Head, ac- 
10 the Apoilolical Eitabiifhment. The 
Copy of the ConfelTion of thofe three Roman Pref- 
bytcis, PAaximus, \Jrbahus, Si!onius\ and others, 
who had been unhappily engaged in the Schifm of 
~NovaUanvs $ which is inferred in a Letter of Cor- 
nelius to St. Cyprian , and found likewife amongft 
his ♦, affords us another Froof of thefe things, 
e thole three Penitents, retracing what they 
had done ^ in conf effing their Faith, exprefs them- 
felves thus •, * " We acknowledge, that Cornelius- 
c: is chofen' Bi(hop of this molt holy Catholick 
" Church, (viz.* of fyhre j by the Omnipotent God, 
ec and by our Lord Chrift. We confefs our Error $ 
c ' we .en irhpofed. upon ^ we have been abu- 

V fed by Treachery, and en fca ring Talk. But tho' 
c; we feemed to hold Communion with a Schif- 
c; maticfc, and an Heretli our Mind' was al- 

t; ways llncerely in the Church. For we are not 
" ignoranr, that as there is one God. and one Lord 
* Chrilt, whom we have confefled j and one Holy 
* c Ghoft ^ fo there ought to be but one Bifhop in 

* Ibid. Corn. Epift. 49. gd Cypr, 

" a Catholick 

Episcopacy Ajjerted. 215 

cc a Catholick Church. Our Adverfaries may per- 
haps think, that feme Terms in this Declaration 
are too ftrohg ^ and that they favour too much ano- 
ther Caufe, which we are not here pleading for : 
Though then every Church was called CathoJick\ 
as it might very well be, which profeiTed the Pa- 
rity of the Gofpe), and the Unity of the Spirit. 
But we are not here difputing with thofe of mo- 
dern Rome, whether the Bifhops, before whom 
thefe ConfeiTors recanted , intended to make them 
fay, that there ought to be one Bifhop over the 
whole Catholick Univerfal Church > The Queftion 
is, how the State of the Hierarchy flood in this 
third Century ^ and what was the DoQrine of the 
Fathers, who flourifh'd in it, concerning the In- 
{Utution of Epifcopacy. Now it appears, by the 
publick Acknowledgment of thofe three eminent 
Penitents, that in a particular Catholick Church 
over the reft of the Clergy there ought to be a 
Bifliop, and but one^ and that he is thereunto ap- 
pointed by God. Wherein it is obfervabie, that 
this Profeflion was not for'e'd from them, though: 
it might be required at their Admiffion to the Peace 
of the Churchy but that they made it freely, after 
mature Confederation , as the refult of their Judg- 
ment: For they declare fo much in the Letter, 
which they writ afterwards to St. Cyprian upon 
that occafion. * " We are certain, fay they, that 
" we having ©deliberately, Habit >' confilio , &c. 
And we may farther take notice, if we confider 
the Circurnftances of this Affair, that it was not 
only the Belief of the Perfons concerned $ but alfo 
of the five Bifhops, who received their Recanta- 
tion' 5 and of the whole Clergy, and People, who 
were prefent at it in a great multitude. For it is 
not to be imagined, that all thefe (not to men- 
tion the Church of Africa) would have expreiTed 

* Ibid. Max. &e. Epift. 53. ad Cypr. 

Pa fo 

2i6 The Divine Right of 

fo much Joy, and Satisfaction, as we are told by 
Cornelius they did, at fuch a Confeflion ^ if they 
had not thought it Sincere, and Orthodox. 

I prefume, I need not quote here the feveral 
Paffages in St. Cyprian's Works, wherein he fup- 
pofes, or exprefly lays down the Divine, and Apo^ 
ftolical Inftitution of Epifcopacy •, that being, I 
hope, pretty clear by what I have already men- 
tioned. However for Method's fake, I fhail pro- 
duce two or three of thej'tnoft confiderable , to 
(hut up this third, and laft Century. And the firft 
is that remarkable one, which we meet with in 
that memorable Speech he made to the Bifhops, 
at the opening of the great Council of Carthage^ 
Anno 256. when the Queftion was to be debated, 
Whether the Hereticks were to be Baptized I 
There to engage them to deliver their Opinion 
freely, without fearing any one's Judgment, but 
God's, from whom alone they held their Office, 
and to whom alone they were accountable for 
their Adminiftration •, he exhorts them thus ; * " Let 
ce us all wait the Judgment of our Lord Jefus 
w Chrifl, who alone has the Power of fetting up 
ec us (Bifhops) over his Church, to Govern it s 
" and of Judging of our Proceedings. If it had 
not been the Doctrine of thofe Times, St. Cyprian 
would never have offered to exprefs himielf in 
that manner: There were too many honeft, and 
able Divines in that Aflembly, to Swallow down 
fuch a fulfome piece of Flattery •, if they had not 
been of his mind. The fecond Paffage of St. Cy- 
frtan, is found t Epift. 59. where having (hewn 
by feveral Texts ofScripture the Obligation of 
Chilians to obey their Bifhops, he recapitulates 
his Difcourfe $ and fummons it up into this : 

* Cone. Carth. Praf. 

t Cypr? £pifc 5* ad Corp, 

* c Seeing 

Episcopacy Afferted. a 17 

* c Seeing we have fuch weighty, and fo many 
4 other Evidences of the Divine Appointment of 
* c the Sacerdotal, I e. the Epifcopal Authority and 
<c Power : What Orange Men muft thofe be, who 
• c cannot be deterr'd from being Enemies to the 
u Bifhops* and Rebels to the Catholick Church, 
" either by the forewarning Commination of our 
• c Lord, or the Vengeance of the Judgment to 
" come ! 

After what I have produced out of thefe two 
celebrated Authors, I have reafon to expett, that 
our Adverfaries will affent to that Pofition of the 
Learned Monfieur Daille, a zealous Afferter of Prefc 
bytery ^ * Tertii jam ad Extrema vergentls Seculi 
tempore, penc ubique in orbe Romano dijiinSa fu- 
iffe Epifcopi & Presbyteri non tantiim Officia & 
Munia, fed etiam nomina -, ex in qu<z fuperfunt 
Origenti, & ex Cypriani maxime Epiflolis^ Sole 
meridiano clarius ejfe : u That it is clearer than 
w the Sun at Midday, from fuch of Origen's 
" Writings as are extant, and efpecially from 
cc Cyprian's Epiftles ^ that towards the end of the 
cc third Century, not only the Offices and Funfti- 
cc ons, but alfo the Names of Bifhop and Pref- 
" byter, were diftinguifh'd almoft all the Roman 
u World over. And that they will not be fo di£ 
ingenuous, as to refufe to fubfcribe to that folemn 
Declaration of their great Calvin, in his notable 
Difcourfe concerning the Necefjity of Reforming 
the Churchy wherein, commending the Conftitu- 
tion of the Hierarchy, as it flood in St. Cyprian's 
Days, he exprefles himfelf in thefe words*, + Tj- 
lem nobis hierarchiam ft exhibeant, in qua fie emi- 
neant Epifcopi, ut Chrifto fubeffe non recufent -, ut 
ab Mo tanquam unico Capite pendeant^ & ad ipfum 

* DalJ. de Script. Dion. & Ign. falfo attr. lib. 2. cap. g& 
t Calv. deNecefl". Rcf . Eccl. Tuft EdicAmft, 

refer antur 3 

a 1 8 The DivineRighto/ 

referantur^ in qua fie inter fe Fraternam Societa- 
tem colant, ut non alio modo qudm ejus veritate 
Jint colligati \ turn vera nullo non Anatbemate dig- 
nos fatear, fi qui erunt, qui non earn revereantur y 
fummaque obedientia objervent : " That if the 
Cl Church ( the Reman in his time ) would agree 
" to fuch an Epifcopacy ^ no Curfes could be ima- 
<c gioed, which he (houid not think thofe wor- 
u thy of, who would not fubmit to it, and em- 
cc brace it with all Reverence, and Dutiful Obe- 
" dience. 


The Conclusion. 

\7V7Hat refults from what I have faid hitherto ^ and 
* * what other Inference can be made from the 
feverai Reafonings, Fafts, and Reflexions, I have 
delivered in this Difcourfe^ than that Epifcopacy 
is of Divine, and Apoftolical Inrtitution, in the three 
Senfes I have explained : That it was the Govern- 
ment of the Chriltian Church during the three firft 
and purelt Ages of it-, and was intended by Jefus 
Chrilt, and his Apoitles, to be Perpetual in it to 
the end of the World > Which is lb true, and like- 
wile that it is abfolutely neceffary for the main- 
taining a good Order in it 5 that I am bold to af- 
firm, that if a general Reformation were to be at- 
tempted in the Proteftant part of it, thofe very 
Men, who molt oppofe it, muft as readily. concur 
to the ettablifliing of it ^ unlefs they would run 
into an Anarchical Confuiion, as bad in fome re- 
fpecls as that of Bealts. And even amonglt fome 

6 of 

Episcopacy Ajferted. 2 1 9 

of thefe Animals, however dcftltute of Reafon and 
Judgment, we may obferve, as to the Management 
of thernfeives, a Glimpfe and Degree of Subordi- 
nation. So then if there fhouid be an (Ecumeni- 
cal Council of Proteftant Paftors conven'd, or par- 
ticular Synods held •, they muft either agree upon 
that Form of Church-Government, or continue di- 
vided, as to the Principles of outward Commu- 
nion, Catholick Unity, and the Bond of Peace: 
They could never concur in the Fundamentals of 
Difcipline ^ and what fhouid be put up by the 
one, would be pulled down by the others ^ there 
would be eternal Wranglings between them. That 
the Unity of the Spirit therefore, in the Bond of 
good Government, may be preferved, and remain 
fix'd, not only in the Catholick, but particular 
Churches •, there muft be Chiefs, to hold the Bridie 
in their Hands j to enatt Conftitutions for Difci- 
pline, and to caufe them by their Authority to be 
obferved by all.Perfons concerned. Other wife if 
all Minifters come to take upon them to be Equal, 
the AiTembly dividing in its Opinions, that happy 
Union, wherein the very Subfiftence and Welfare 
of the Church, as a Society, confifts, will be dif- 
folved •, and nothing will be feen in it, but a mife- 
rabie Diffraction. 

But if the Epifcopal Government is fo neceiTa- 
ry, and ufelul, for the maintaining a good Order 
in the Chriftian Church ^ I conclude it no lefs to 
be of Divine Inftitution : That very Confederation 
makes it fo. For who can be the Author of a re- 
gular CEconomy, and efpecially of that which is 
to raife the Glory of the Ecclefiaftical Society 
above all that is feen in this World, but God ? 
If then God is the Author of good Order, and 
the Epifcopal Government is neceflary to maintain 
it in the Chriftian Church j it follows from thence, 


aao T6e Divine Right of 

that he is the Author of that Government. And 
indeed, who can think otherwife ? If we confider, 
that the Hierarchy is as ancient as the World ^ 
and that there was never any Church, I had al- 
rnoft faid Religion, of any kind, but had a Sub- 
ordination in its Miniftry, except in thefe latter 
Days. It is agreed on all Hands, that under the 
Mofaick Difpenfation , the Government of the 
Church was Hierarchical. And I have fhewn, how 
under the Gofpel Jefus Chrift was fo far from 
touching that, unlefs as to what was Typical, and 
Ceremonial in it ^ that he conformed to it, and 
gave a new Commiflion for the perpetuating of it 
to the end of the World : That his Apoftles, by 
Infpiration from the Holy Ghoft, not only ap- 
proved it, but delivered feveral Inftruftions for 
the Exercife of it ^ and both praftifed it in their 
own Perfon, and appointed others to do the fame ^ 
and that it ran through the three firft and pureft 
Centuries of Chriftianity, without any Contra- 
diction ^ all the Faithful chearfully embracing it. 
If thefe things are fo, as I humbly conceive, I have 
made them evident, both out of Holy Scripture, 
and the rnoft Primitive Antiquity ; nothing therein 
appearing to the contrary : I hope, all diffenting 
Perfons, that pretend to Sincerity and Ingenuity, 
will at laft be convinced, that Epifcopacy has been, 
and ought to be the Government of the Chriftian 
Church, notwithftanding the many Prejudices raifed 
againft it. And as a juft Confequence of that, 
that they will readily comply with it, even for the 
fake of that good Order, which it is fo peculiarly 
adapted to maintain. 

I have alledged, that the Hierarchy is as anci- 
ent as the World ^ and that there was never any 
Church, or Religion of any kind, but had a Sub- 
ordination in its Miniftry, till the Reformation 


Episcopacy Afferted. 221 

mEurofe^ when fo many of the Reformers abroad, 
from an averfion to Popifh Bifhops, unhappily cait 
off Epifcopacy it felf, and fee up another Form of 
Church-Government of their own deviling, to the 
great prejudice of the Reformation, and hindrance 
of the Benefits of that entire Catholick Union^and 
Communion of ours with thofe other Reformed 
Churches, which otherwife had been in as much 
Perfection, as it was among the Churches of God 
in the bed, and pureft Times. But to return to the 
general practice of Religious Societies, this is ano- 
ther, and fupernumerary Senfe of the Divine Infti- 
tution of the Hierarchy ; that it has a natural, gene- 
ral, and conftant Courfe in Religious Societies,which 
are numerous ^ and cannot be changed, without break- 
ing the Laws, and Order of the Creation -, or very 
much weakning them. For as Nature works but 
by the Impreflion of its Creator; we may properly 
fay, that what it does in its effential, permanent, 
and indifpenfable Courfe, is of Divine Inftitution: 
Becaufe it does it but by an Order, and Laws, where- 
of God is the Author •, and according to his good 
Pleafure. This is chiefly a Queftion of Faft, where- 
in Experience gives this Suppofition its full ftrength. 
For if it be true, that from the beginning of the 
World, all along to thefe latter Times j there has 
been no Religion, generally profeffed, without a 
Subordination amongft its Minilters : Whence can 
fuch an Univerfal Order, as old, and permanent as 
Nature, have proceeded ^ but from God, the Au- 
thor of it, who fo inftkuted it, according to the 
eternal Rules of his infinite Wifdom I Let us there- 
fore briefly run over the feveral forts of Religions, 
which have obtained in the Worlds and we (hall fee, 
whether the Pofition be verifiable. And thofe may 
be reduced, as conrradiftinguifhed from the Ckri- 
fiian, and the MofaicaI y which I have accounted 


222 The Divine Right of 

for -, Into that of the Faithful before the Law, the 
Heathen, and the Mahometan. 

As to the Religion of the Faithful before the 
Law-, though the Accounts of its Do&rine, and 
Difcipline in Scripture, are but fhort and obfcurej 
yet we may eafily perceive, and rationally conclude 
ihence, that the Government of the Church then 
was Hierarchical, and had a Subordination in its 
Miniftry. For it is agreed on all hands, that du- 
ring that Period the Firlt-born Male in each Fa- 
mily, but where God was pleafed by a particular 
Difpenfation to order it otherwife, was not only 
the Prince, but the Prieft of it : And that as to 
their general Concernments, whether Civil or Re- 
ligious, the Eldelt had a Pre-eminency over the 
reft. Since then the Firlt-born in each Family, 
and the Eldeft, as to their general Concernments, 
had fuch a Superintendency -, and that by a Na- 
tural and Divine Inftitution : Doubtlefs on theit 
publick Occafions there was an Order obferved, 
and there mult have been Superiors and Inferiors 
amongft them. What a ftrange Confufion would 
there have been elfe in their folemn AfTemblies, 
if fome Subordination had not been appointed ! 
Adam, who was the Firlt-born, or rather rhe firft 
and only Created of all Mankind •, as he had the 
Dominion of the World committed to him, Gen. i. 
28. fo he governed the Church in chief, as long as 
he lived, viz. nine hundred and thirty Years. So 
did his Son Seth with, and under him, Gen. iv. 26. 
whilft his Father lived -, and after his Death, the 
reft of his own Life, as the Eldeft-born reputed. 
And in like manner Enoch, Noah, and the other 
Antediluvian Patriarchs, who adhered to the Wor- 
ship of the true God, till the Flood -, as they had 
feen it pra£tifed amongft their Forefathers. It is 
cot to be imagined, but both then and afterwards, 


Episcopacy Afferted. 223 

the Patriarchs in their refpe&ive Families, and 
their Defcendents ♦, had the chief Places, as in the 
State, fo in the Churchy next their Firft-born Sons^ 
and then others, in their order. To give one In- 
ftance or two of this after the Deluge; When 
Noab with his Family came out of the Ark, God 
renewed his Covenant with him, and his Sons 5 
andtgranted him the Dominion of the New World, 
Gen. ix. as he had done to Adam of the Old ; in- 
venting him with the Princely, and Prieftly Power, 
which he exercifed in chief for the fpace of three 
hundred and fifty Years. It is evident, that lie 
was a Prieft 5 fince the Scripture tells us exprefly, 
Gen. viii. 20. That upon his coming forth with 
all the Living Creatures out of the Ark, he built 
an Altar unto the Lord, and took of every clean 
Beaft, and of every clean Fowl, and offered Burnt- 
Offerings on the Altar : And that he is called, 
2 Pet. ii. 5. a Preacher of Right eoufnefs. And can 
we think, that when Melchizedek met Abram, it- 
turning from the Slaughter of the four Kings, and 
the refcue of Lot , his Brother's Son , Gen. xiv. 
that Abram look'd upon Melchizedek, as a mere 
Firft-born of fome Family, who came to congra- 
tulate him upon his ViQory, or to offer with him 
an Euchariftical Sacrifice to God for the fame* 
Certainty, in this refpeft he was Greater than the 
other : tor he was the Head of his Family, and 
of a Family, which was the fiift of the Covenant; 
fo that not only the Regalty, but the Prietthood 
belonged to him. But the extraordinary Refpeft 
Abram paid Melchizedek, upon this Occafion, by 
giving him Tithes of all^ (hews plainly enough, 
that he owned in him a iuperior Character to hie, 
And particularly the Aftton of Melchizedek, in 
Blejfing Abram, puts this Point out of difpute, 
that he was Greater than he: For it is St. Paul's 


224 the Divine Right of 

Maxim, Heb. vii. 7. That without Contradiction, thi 
lefs U bleffed of the better. I (hall not determine 
here, whether Melchizedek was the fame with 
Shem, as it is commonly received; or with Ham^ 
as it is conje&ured by a Learned * Writer, not 
without great Probability > It is very likely, all 
Circumftances confider'd, that he was one of them 
two; which makes this Example of his highly ap- 
pofite to my prefent Subjefl. He is fa id, Gen. xiv. 
i S. to have been King of Salem 5 and is ftiled there, 
by way of Eminency, the Prieji of the mofi High 
Goi : A very ancient, and notable Perfon in the 
Church ; Without Father^ without Mother^ without 
Defcent) having neither beginning of Days> nor end 
of Life: But made like unto the Son of God^ as he is 
defcribed Heb. vii. 3. and a Type of Jefus Chrift, as 
to his Regal, and Sacerdotal Office •, in Contradifti- 
ftion to that of Aaron. He muft have been one of 
the moft eminent Pontifs of his time, enjoying a high- 
er Dignity than the other Minifters of that Religion. 
Which makes that Judicious Author confefs, tho' 
no great Friend to the Hierarchy, and reprefenting 
that Church as purely Domeftical, and each Fa- 
mily as in a State of Independency •, t * That he 
" believed, that he that was called a Patriarch, 
" the Chief of a Family, exercifed a kind of Su- 
" perintendency over the Priefthood of <his Infe- 
<c riors * and that he was as a High-Prieft in his 
" Family : And particularly, || " That it is moft 
u likely* that Abram paid his Homage to him, 
" who was his Superior ( Melchizedeck) both by 
" his great Age, and by the Privilege of having 
" feen the Flood, and by the Dignity of High- 

* Jur. Hift. Crit. des Dogm. &c. Part t. Chap. 8. 

t Ibid. Chap. 7. Pag. 62. |j Ibid. Chap. 8. Pag. 69. 


Episcopacy Averted. 225 

* c Prieft, wherewith he was inveft\d in the Quality 
" of one of the Patriarchs of the World. And fo 
we may conceive the Church to have been governed 
under Abraham, Ifaac, Jacob, and the twelve Pa- 
triarchs, till the Wildernefs, and the Mofaical Dif- 
penfation$ as far as their Pilgrimage in the Land 
of Canaan, and their Bondage in Egypt permitted 
them to do it. And all this by a Natural, and 
Divine Appointment, as to the Hierarchical Form 
of its Government, and the Subordination amongft 
its Minifters. 

As to the Religion of the Heathens 5 whether 
they derived that Order from the Impreflion of 
Nature, or borrowed it from the People of God > 
is not here very material, fince it tends to the fame 
end, viz. to confirm the Natural, and Divine Infti- 
tution of the Hierarchy in the Church : But it is 
pretty evident, from the Accounts we have of their 
Theology, which are plain in that, that they had 
a Subordination in their Miniftry. For how can 
we think other wife, if we confider either the Mul- 
titude, and Diftin£lion of their Gods -, or their va- 
rious Devotions, and Sacrifices, fome vaft ones, 
even whole Hecatombs ^ or the great number of 
their Priefts ^ or the Quality of fome of them > 
It feems to have been a general Rule amongft them, 
that their Priefts fhould be taken out of their chief 
Families, not excepting the Regal : The Poet tells 
us particularly of Anius, that he was King of Del- 
phos, and Prieft of Apollo $ 

\\Rcx Anita, Rex idem Hominum, Thxbique Saeerdos i 
and the Romans^ even after the Expulfion of their 
Kings, when the Name was become odious to 
them ^ had a Rex Sacrorum, a King of the Sacri- 
fices, though he was Subjeft to their Pontifex 
Maximus. And it is evident from Scripture, in 

ii. Yirg.iEndd, lib, ?v 

O tilt 

216 The DivineRight of 

the time of Ahab, when Elijah challenged the falfe 
Prophets to a Sacrifice, for a tryal whofe was the 
true God •,■ that there appear'd of the Proohets of 
Baal four hundred and fifty, and of the Prophets 
of the Groves four hundred, which eat at Jeze- 
bePs Table, i Kings xviii. 1 9. Could this Religion 
have fubfifted fo long, and in fo large a part of 
the World, under a Government of Parity, and 
without a Subordination in its Miniftry > But the 
Matter of Fa& is plain in the Roman Hiftory *, 
where nothing is more notorious, than that the 
Pontiles Maximi had a Superintendency, and Au- 
thority over all Things facred, and Perfons^ and 
were raifed in Eminency, and Power, above the 
Sacerdotes of a lower Rank - y and the Pop a or 
Vitlimarii : To fay nothing of the Augures,Veftales > 
and other Religious Votaries. Or that th« Priefts 
of their higheft Deities, as they had the chief Care 
of their refpe&ive Temples, fo they were dittin- 
guifh'd from thofe that Officiated under them$ as 
the Flamen Dialts, that of Mars, Apollo, and the 
reft. And as to rhe Religion of the Mahometans \ 
which is fuppofed to be made up of Judaifm, Pa- 
ganifm, and Inftitutions of their Founder's Inven- 
tion : It is well known, that the Subordination is 
obferved in it v fo natural, and univerfal is that 
Order in all Religious Societies !' But whence pro- 
ceeds this Conformity between all Nations, and 
in all Ages, upon the Form of their Ecclefiaftical 
Government, ( give me leave to ufe the Expreflion 
as to fome of them) And how comes it to pafs, 
that being fo different in their Religions, they 
have been able to agree in a Difcipline, whereof 
the very ElTence confifts in a Subordination of Mi- 
nitters ? Why, it proceeds from this, as I have in- 
timated, that fuch an Order feems to come from 
a. Natural, and Divine Inftitution : And that God x 


E f I s c cf p a c Y Afferted. VYj 

himfelf has imprinted the Notion of it in Nature, 
and Nature in the Heart of Man. 

But to return from this fhort DigrefTion, and to 
put an end to this Difcourfe $ all I forefee can be 
objeQed with any colour of Reafon againfl what 
I have been afferting, and what is indeed the only 
Refuge of our Adverfaries •> is, that Jefus Chrift 
left it to the Prudence of his A pottles, to fettle 
what Government they pleafed in his Church ^ and 
to order it according to theCircumltances of Times, 
and Places. But if what I have alledged * and I 
think, evidently proved out of Scripture, and un- 
deniable Hiftory, is true^ the Objection is already 
anfwered, and little more needs to be added, to 
lay it wholly afleep. And indeed can any one 
imagine, that our Blefled Saviour, who was the 
Wifdom of God, fhould refer to the Fancy of Men 
the Government of a Society, which was to bear 
up againlt the Gates of Hell ; without giving his 
CommilTioners their Inftru&ions, either in his Life- 
time, or upon his riling from the Dead $ or at leaft 
directing them to the Infpirations of his Spirit > 
Or will any be fo bold, as to affirm, that in his 
infinite Forefight he could not calculate a Form of 
Difcipline, which fhould ferve his Church to the 
end of the World ♦, and be proper for all Times, 
and Places, to anfwer his eternal Purpofes > He 
would have wanted that Prudence, which he de- 
pended upon in his Apoftles. It was a Saying of 
the famous Luther, That Humane Policy bad ruined 
the Church ^ which he knew to be true by Expe- 
rience in the Communion he left, and reformed 
from •, if not as to its outward Splendor, yet at 
leaft as to its inward Purity. But if no Arguments 
will prevail upon the Mind of thefe Men, to bring 
them off from this their beloved Opinion; let them 
fairly own, that Epifcopacy is of Apoftolicai In- 


228 The Divine Right^ &c. 

ftitution in this Senfe, that the Apoftles in cheif 
Prudence judged it the beft Form of Eccleflaiticai 
Government, and that it is the ancienteft in the 
Chriftian Church 5 -having been ufed throughout the 
three firft and moft uncorrupt Ages of it, and con- 
tinued all along every where to the Days of the 
Reformation from Popery, as it is univerfally ac- 
knowledged. And fmce it was eftabiifh'd all the 
World over, upon the growing up of Chriftianity; 
and theDivifions of Chriftians amongft themfelves, 
as the moft effe£tual Remedy againft Schifm ^ ac- 
cording to the account of their St. 7erom, whom 
they lo often appeal to: If ihey will no?" do it 
for other Reafons, let them embrace it for that, 
now the Proteftant Church is grown populous irf 
Europe, and is miferably divided in molt Parts of 
it 5 but particularly in this great Kingdom, though 
at laft united in its Temporal Government-, that 
our Spiritual Jerujaiem may be again at Unity in 
it felf, and become at laft a Praife in the whole; 


% m * 


llgM^ ^v* /.;* 

I I «» 



•i r 

•» .'V